29 September 2026 | Story Prof Narnia Bohler-Muller | Photo Unsplash
gregory-fullard-H4l6KUy3E6w-unsplash
Youth Mental Health & Well-being is important for every society.

Opinion article by Prof Narnia Bohler-Muller, Research Theme Leader: Flourishing Life, Directorate Research Development, University of the Free State


There is a sentence in the middle of the United Nations’ new report on youth mental health that I have not been able to set down: “There is no ‘cure’ for being human”. Thriving, its authors write, does not mean the absence of hardship. It is a rare admission for an institution whose native idiom is targets and indicators, and it signals something larger than a change of tone.

Youth Mental Health & Well-being in an Uncertain World: A Global Call to Action, produced by the UN Youth Office and the United Nations University International Institute for Global Health and launched in September’s UN General Assembly, asks governments to stop treating young people’s distress mainly as a matter of individual symptoms. Instead it proposes an ecosystem model of 10 linked domains: governance, education, decent work, housing, climate, digital technology, peace, the arts, sport and spirituality. Each can tend or erode a young person’s life.

 

Sobering figures

The figures are sobering. One in seven people aged 10 to 19 lives with a mental health condition, and half of these conditions emerge by 18. Suicide remains among the leading causes of death for the young, and close to three-quarters of the world’s suicides occur in low- and middle-income countries. Yet only 56% of countries have a child and adolescent mental health policy, against 81% with adult policies, and most spend less than 2% of their health budgets on mental health.

More telling than the numbers is the report’s philosophical turn. Drawing on Tyler VanderWeele’s flourishing research at Harvard, it insists that well-being belongs to the person and to her world at once: the tree and the forest must both be doing well. It speaks of relational well-being, of care, connection and community as the ground of collective health, and of each young person as, in some measure, the embodiment of her surroundings.

 

Flourishing denied

African readers will recognise this terrain. Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu; motho ke motho ka batho: a person is a person through other persons. Ubuntu has long held that personhood is not a possession but an achievement of relation, and that no self can flourish in a community that is failing. The report arrives, by way of Harvard, at a truth spoken in isiZulu, isiXhosa and Sesotho for generations. I welcome that convergence, and want to push it further.

In my own work I call this condition flourishing denied: the tearing of the relational webs that hold a life, from the household to the planet. Read this way, much of what we name youth mental illness is not, or not only, a malfunction inside the young person. It is an accurate registration of a world that has come apart around her. The report comes close to saying so. Citing UNICEF, it notes that six in 10 young people faced systemic challenges in the past year, led by economic instability and climate change, and that more than half lack hope for the future. UNESCO, it adds, has found an erosion of young people’s belief in their own futures, rooted in historical injustice. Despair of this kind is not a disorder of perception. It is, very often, perception itself.

This matters because the language of resilience, which the report uses generously, can return the burden to the young. We teach adolescents to regulate their emotions, to breathe, to cope, and then send them out into economies that have no place for them. Resilience is a virtue; it is not a policy. No young person should have to become heroically adaptable to survive conditions a decent society would not impose.

Nowhere is this clearer than at home. In the second quarter of this year Statistics South Africa reported youth unemployment of 47.4% among 15- to 34-year-olds, and more than a third of 15- to 24-year-olds were neither employed nor in education or training. The report cites South African research finding that between 21 and 24.5% of students live with conditions ranging from social anxiety to post-traumatic stress. Set side by side, these figures make the ecosystem model concrete. For many young South Africans, decent work is not one domain among 10; it is the load-bearing wall.

 

Hope in its pages

The report’s most consequential move is to anchor all this in human rights. It recalls the Secretary-General’s insistence that mental health is a right, not a privilege, and General Assembly resolution A/RES/77/300, which defines mental health not by the absence of a condition but by an environment in which dignity is respected. South Africa needs no persuading. Our Constitution guarantees access to health care, adequate housing and a basic education, and an environment not harmful to health or well-being. The report offers a way to read these guarantees together: a student’s panic attack in an overcrowded residence may be a housing question, a safety question and a labour-market question.

There is hope in its pages too. Much of the report’s texture comes from youth-led initiatives, many of them African: peer-support circles, restorative justice networks, arts-based healing, digital helplines. Young people are already building the ecosystems that states have been slow to fund, and the report rightly insists that they be co-authors of the response, not its beneficiaries.

A call to action is only as good as the action it calls forth, and the report is candid that policies on paper have not yet become services on the ground. Its model is a map. What South Africa needs now is the political will to walk it: to budget for mental health, to design labour, housing and education policy with young minds in view, and to resource the young people already doing the work.

There is an isiZulu word I return to often: ngisazophumelela, I will yet succeed; I am still becoming. It is not a statement of certainty but a grammar of persistence, a future tense spoken from inside difficulty. The question the UN has put to us is whether we will build a world in which it can come true.

Disclaimer: Prof Bohler-Muller writes in her personal capacity and does not necessarily represent the views or position of the University of the Free State.


We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept