Skip to main content
Log in

Mainstreaming gambling-related harm in Britain as a public health issue

  • Comment
  • Published:
Journal of Public Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

In this paper we make the case for gambling–related harm treatment services in Britain to be mainstreamed within the remit of public health. Although the focus of this article is on the British situation many of these issues are generalisable to other jurisdictions.

The profile of problem gamblers

In Britain, 0.9 % of adults are problem gamblers, and it is more common in the young, socially deprived and the ethnic minorities.

Who provides and who should provide treatment services?

At present in Britain, almost all dedicated funding to address gambling-related harm is provided by voluntary contributions from the gambling industry and the level of service provision is far from adequate.

Mainstreaming gambling treatment

Problem gambling is associated with a range of health and social harms yet it often goes unnoticed for a variety of reasons. Early interventions can minimise or prevent the negative effects of problem gambling on various spheres of the gambler’s life, his/her family and wider society.

Conclusion

Consistent with plans to move the commissioning of drug-misuse treatment services within the remit of public health, it would seem entirely logical to commission gambling-related harm treatment services from the public health ‘purse’, and to request that gambling-related harm falls under the remit of the new Health and Well-Being Boards.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Harm is used in this context to refer both to the direct harm experienced by the gambler and that caused to others such as family members, friends, employers, members of the community.

  2. The financial implications for individuals and households of the current recession are likely to exacerbate rates of problem gambling, given the associations with low income and unemployment, and there is evidence of people using gambling as a (counter-intuitive) method of attempting to increase income.

  3. Other potential social harms might include impaired school attendance and academic achievement, and criminality such as theft to subsidise gambling activities.

  4. The BGPS is a population-level survey applicable to England, Scotland and Wales only. In December 2010, the Northern Irish Department for Social Development published its own prevalence survey, indicating higher levels of problem gambling in that jurisdiction (2.2 %), as compared with the rest of the UK.

  5. For detailed information regarding the nature and purpose of the DSM-IV in this context, please refer to pp. 73–74 of the British Gambling Prevalence Survey (2010), prepared by NatCen for the Gambling Commission.

  6. The Index of Multiple Deprivation combines a number of indicators, covering a range of economic, social and housing issues, into a single deprivation score for each small area in England.

  7. The work of the RGT is advised by the Responsible Gambling Strategy Board, which is the entity that provides advice and guidance both to the Gambling Commission and the Responsible Gambling Fund (now Trust). A Statement of Intent between RGT, RGSB and the Gambling commission has been drawn up, within which RGT confirms its commitment to the data collection framework and to objective evaluation of funded projects.

References

  • American Psychiatric Association (APA) (1994) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th edn.). American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowden-Jones H, Clark L (2011) Pathological gambling: a neurobiological and clinical update. Br J Psychiatry 1999:87–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George S, Copello A (2011) Treatment provision for Britain’s problem gamblers: present gaps and future opportunities. Adv Psychiatr Treat 17:318–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George S, Gerada C (2011) Problem gamblers in primary care: can GPs do more? Brit J Gen Pract 61:248–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korn DA, Shaffer HJ (1999) Gambling and the health of the public: adopting a public health perspective. J Gambl Stud 15:289–365

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lesieur HR, Rosenthal MD (1991) Pathological gambling: a review of the literature (prepared for the American Psychiatric Association Task Force on DSM-IV Committee on disorders of impulse control not elsewhere classified). J Gambl Stud 7:5–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petry NM, Stinson FS, Grant BF (2005) Comorbidity of DSM-IV pathological gambling and other psychiatric disorders: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. J Clin Psychiatry 66:564–574

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wardle H, Moody A, Spence S, Orford J, Volberg R, Jotangia D et al (2010) British gambling prevalence survey national centre for social research. The Stationery Office, London

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to Heather Wardle of NatCen for her contributions to the drafting of this article.

Conflict of interests

Jim Fearnley was formerly head of policy and research at the Responsible Gambling Fund (RGF), and is now a freelance consultant. Dr Sanju George has received funding from RGF for research and was the clinical lead for RGF-funded review of clinical frameworks in gambling treatment services across England. Eleanor Roaf is a Consultant in Public Health in NHS Manchester and a member of the Responsible Gambling Strategy Board.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sanju George.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fearnley, J., Roaf, E., George, S. et al. Mainstreaming gambling-related harm in Britain as a public health issue. J Public Health 21, 215–217 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-012-0530-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-012-0530-y

Keywords

Navigation