Dr. Robert Ladouceur - Self-Exclusion and the Court

Self-Exclusion and the Court: Recent Developments and their Implications for Responsible Gambling

New Horizons in Responsible

Gambling Conference

Vancouver, B.C., January 28-30, 2013

Tuesday 29th, 10:50-11:50

Robert Ladouceur, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Laval University, Québec, Canada.

www.ulaval.ca 2

Outline

1. Brief reminder of what is Responsible Gambling

• Different pathways to achieve RG

• The most important progress made over the last 3 decades in the field of gambling

2. Main results of Self-Exclusion trials

3. Responsibility issues

4. Conclusions and questions

www.ulaval.ca

Responsible Gambling is defined as

a set of policies and practices designed to prevent and reduce potential harms associated with

gambling

This can be achieved only by restricting gambling expenditure to affordable limits.

What is Responsible Gambling?

www.ulaval.ca

When we achieve this goal, the

incidence of problem gambling is eventually reduced (that is, the development

of new cases of problem gamblers over a period of time).

More specifically…

www.ulaval.ca

But how can we achieve this goal?

www.ulaval.ca

Stockwell (2006) suggested three pathways, but from a broader perspective, we have only 2 options or perspectives for

gambling related problems, and they are not necessarily mutually

exclusive (Harm minimization can’t be applied to

gambling-related problems)

Tim Stockwell’s pathways

www.ulaval.ca

Strategies that are intended to

reduce

the availability or accessibility of a

product.

Supply Reduction: The first pathway

www.ulaval.ca

Strategies aimed to motivate users to

consume less overall and/or less per

occasion.

Targeting the individual/gambling

activities.

Demand Reduction: Second pathway

www.ulaval.ca

What is the main difference between

Supply Reduction and

Demand Reduction

www.ulaval.ca 10

Internal

Control

External

Control

Versus

www.ulaval.ca 11

Internal

Control

External

Control

Versus

Supply reduction Demand reduction

www.ulaval.ca 12

Where should we MAINLY focus our

interventions?

Internal Control

www.ulaval.ca 13

What is the major progress we have made

over the last 3 decades in the field of gambling?

www.ulaval.ca 14

Beyond any doubt, it is our commitment to

Empirical research

www.ulaval.ca 15

1. Publication outlets: International Gambling Studies

Journal of Gambling Studies

Journal of Gambling Issues

Asian Journal of Gambling Issues and Public Health

Addiction and other important Journals

2. Number of grants in the field of Gambling

3. Number of researchers and clinicians

4. The use of empirically validated treatment

5. The number of important conferences and meetings

Empirical research as indicated in the following areas

www.ulaval.ca

Why is Self-Exclusion an Important RG procedure?

For at least 3 reasons

1. Based on internal control

2. Few PG will seek professional help (3% per yr)

3. Some empirical or scientific support has been found

www.ulaval.ca

1. The patron approach an employee of the venue

2. The patron signs a self-exclusion agreement and indicates a length of time

3. The patron engages him or herself not to come back in the venue

4. If the patron breaches, and the staff identifies the patron, the staff will walk the gambler out of the venue.

What is self-exclusion

www.ulaval.ca

Main Findings of 7 studies

• The urge to gamble is significantly reduced during the SE period

• The perception of control over gambling is significantly increased

• The amount of time and money spent gambling is reduced during the SE period

• The intensity of negative consequences from gambling is significantly reduced

• Scores on the main instruments used to identify and diagnose gambling disorders (SOGS and DSM-IV) showed a significant reduction on gambling related problems.

• About 25 to 30% of the pathological gamblers at the time of entering SE do not meet this criterion after a period of 6 or 12 months

www.ulaval.ca

Main Findings Over Time Limitations

• At the 6, 12, and 24 month about 40% to 50% had breached their contract at least once.

•One comment expressed by many SE patrons is that they felt alone during the SE period.

We can address this issue during the discussion period

www.ulaval.ca

And what about the responsibility…

www.ulaval.ca

Responsibility

• We should never forget that the ultimate decision to gamble or not gamble belongs to the individual.

• Voluntary self exclusion (as labeled in BC) a personal decision, relying on the individual’s responsibility to comply with it.

• Operators should offer a variety of RG measures on a voluntary basis.

• Operators have the responsibility to offer RG measures that are based on a scientific rather than on a political agenda.

www.ulaval.ca

Responsibility

•Operators should have some effective procedures to identify SE breachers.

•Operators have the responsibility to examine which procedures are the most effective to achieve this goal

www.ulaval.ca

And what about the responsibility…

•When exclusion is filled by a third party, the operators and/or the policy makers have the responsibility to evaluate such a procedure in order to avoid iatrogenic or negative unexpected effects.

www.ulaval.ca

Do you agree with me?

Thank You Robert.Ladouceur@psy.ulaval.ca

24