Casino Selfexclusion Programmes: A Review of the Issues

1
Casino Self-exclusion Programmes A Review of the
Issues

• Nadine Nowatzki and Robert Williams
• Alberta Gaming Research Institute
• University of Lethbridge
• Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada

2
Casino Self-exclusion Outline

• Prototypical model
• Overview of self-exclusion in Canada
• Effectiveness of self-exclusion
• Recommendations on how to improve it

3
The Prototypical Programme

• Pamphlets and/or website explain programme
• Individuals can sign up at casinos
• Fill out application and have photo taken
• Are advised that help is available
• May apply to all casinos in jurisdiction, does
  not apply to other gambling venues
• Names and photographs of individuals are
  distributed to casinos in jurisdiction

4
Prototypical Programme, Contd

• Individuals removed from mailing lists
• Casinos refer to list before issuing player
  cards, cashing cheques, paying jackpots, etc
• Usually irrevocable, requirements for re-entry
  vary
• Self-exclusion enforced by security personnel
• Violation of contract may result in trespass
  charge
• Many casinos also have involuntary exclusion lists

5
Canada
6
Effectiveness of Casino Self-exclusion

• Requires person to admit to problem
• No way of knowing how many individuals re-enter
  casino during time of exclusion
• Does not apply to other forms of legal/illegal
  gambling
• Ladouceur et al (2000)- 30 of participants
  completely stopped gambling once excluded
• Netherlands- 40 of problem gamblers were reached
  by Holland casino prevention policy
• Overall utilisation rates in Canada are between
  .4 and 1.5 for problem gamblers

7
Recommendation 1 Mandatory Promotion

• Promotion in many venues is not visible, and
  where present is promoted indirectly
• Previous studies indicate that many people are
  not aware of its existence
• Some casinos do not take requests for
  self-exclusion seriously

8
Recommendation 2 Irrevocable Contracts,
Minimum Ban Length of 5 Years

• Self-exclusion has little value if individuals
  can revoke contract
• Substance abuse literature supports longer
  periods to prevent relapse
• Evidence that patrons prefer longer, irrevocable
  contracts

9
Recommendation 3 Jurisdictional
Standardisation and Uniformity

• In parts of Europe self-exclusion applies to all
  casinos in the country
• In Canada province-wide (except Québec)
• In parts of USA each venue within a jurisdiction
  could have a unique list
• Patrons should not have to enter casino to
  sign-up or renew self-exclusion

10
Recommendation 4 Extend exclusion to all
gaming venues restrict all gambling to gaming
venues

• Large amount of gambling takes place outside of
  casinos
• Apply self-exclusion to other venues
• Bingo halls, racetracks, online gaming, etc
• Remove electronic gaming machines from non-gaming
  venues

11
Recommendation 5 Computerised Identification
Checks for Enforcing Self-exclusion

• Weakness of security many self-excludees are
  easily able to enter venues
• Excludees often try to change their appearance
• As number of excludees increases, enforcement
  becomes more difficult for security staff
• Holland casino mandatory identification and
  registration in computerised database results in
  instant detection

12
Recommendation 6 Penalties for Both Venue and
Gambler Upon Breach

• Gamblers should face penalty must take
  responsibility for actions.
• Trespass charge provides deterrent
• Venues should face financial penalty to ensure
  compliance
• With computerised registration, this issue is
  irrelevant

13
Recommendation 7 Optional Counselling
Mandatory Gambling Education Seminar

• Mandatory counselling may not work
• self-motivation and willingness to participate
  are important in recovery
• Responsible gambling awareness seminar (as in
  Manitoba)
• review of past gambling history, info on how
  gambling works, plan for returning to gamble

14
Recommendation 8 Increased Training
Education of Employees

• To recognize and approach problem gamblers
• Easier to treat problems at earlier stages
• The Netherlands computerised registration
  monitors visiting frequency of guests, provides
  notification upon increases
• Staff approach guest upon sudden increase
• Self-exclusion or visit limitation may be
  recommended
• Many problem gamblers do not believe they have a
  problem- important to be proactive

15
Conclusions

• Self-exclusion has the potential to be an
  effective tool for assisting problem gamblers
• Existing programmes a step in the right direction
  but need to be improved
• Philosophy behind responsible gaming different
  in North America
• More research is needed on these programs
• Holland Casino successful prevention of problem
  gambling not an obstacle to profit