No abstract

Increased prevalence of problem gambling has accompanied the spread of gaming venues in many parts of the world. One intervention to minimise the impact of harmful patterns of gambling behaviours is self-exclusion, where patrons can elect to ban themselves from a gaming venue or its gaming facilities for a specified time period. While self-exclusion programs are widely available, little research has been conducted into their operations and efficacy, particularly from the self-excluders' perspective. This paper presents findings from 35 survey responses and 23 interviews with gamblers who had self-excluded through a centralised service in South Australia. They identified key program shortcomings as low publicity, limits on how many venues they could self-bar from, and inadequate venue monitoring for breaches of self-barring orders. Nevertheless, the centralised service, staffed by trained psychologists and located away from gaming venues, which allows multiple venue barring in one application, appeared advantageous over programs that require people to self-exclude directly from individual gaming venues. Most respondents (85%) had ceased or lessened their gambling in the 12 months following self-barring. Nevertheless, some continued to struggle to manage their gambling, reflected in breaches of their orders and gambling in venues from which they were not excluded.

Problem gambling attracts considerable public stigma, with deleterious effects on mental health and use of healthcare services amongst those affected. However, no research has examined the extent of stigma towards problem gambling within the general population. This study aimed to examine the stigma-related dimensions of problem gambling as perceived by the general public compared to other health conditions, and determine whether the publicly perceived dimensions of problem gambling predict its stigmatisation. A sample of 2000 Australian adults was surveyed, weighted to be representative of the state population by gender, age and location. Based on vignettes, the online survey measured perceived origin, peril, concealability, course and disruptiveness of problem gambling and four other health conditions, and desired social distance from each. Problem gambling was perceived as caused mainly by stressful life circumstances, and highly disruptive, recoverable and noticeable, but not particularly perilous. Respondents stigmatised problem gambling more than sub-clinical distress and recreational gambling, but less than alcohol use disorder and schizophrenia. Predictors of stronger stigma towards problem gambling were perceptions it is caused by bad character, is perilous, non-recoverable, disruptive and noticeable, but not due to stressful life circumstances, genetic/ inherited problem, or chemical imbalance in the brain. This new foundational knowledge can advance understanding and reduction of problem gambling stigma through countering inaccurate perceptions that problem gambling is caused by bad character, that people with gambling problems are likely to be violent to other people, and that people cannot recover from problem gambling.

No abstract

Partners can be especially vulnerable to the negative effects of gambling problems, but little research has sought to understand partners' experiences from their own unique perspectives. This qualitative interpretive study explored the impacts of gambling problems on partners. In-depth interviews were conducted with 18 partners and ex-partners of people with gambling problems to understand their experiences of gambling problems from their perspectives. The findings showed that partners experienced a wide range of negative effects, especially on their financial security, their emotional, mental and physical health, and on their relationships. The financial impacts of gambling problems on partners were substantial and far-reaching. Some partners were forced to take up extra employment to cover household expenses and pay off gambling-related debts. Others lost their savings, homes, belongings and established ways of life. While these impacts were extensive, partners also experienced a range of emotional impacts that were equally devastating. Their gambling partner's lies, dishonesty and concealment of problems and gambling behaviour created considerable distress, loss of trust and a sense of betrayal. These experiences undermined these partners' sense of self-identity, and created additional conflicts within their relationships. Along with accumulating mental and physical health impacts, these challenges lead to separation and/or divorce for many participants. These findings point to the need for greater understanding of partners' experiences and public health initiatives that protect partners and their families from the harmful effects of gambling problems.