Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 131–138 | Cite as

Reflections on the Voluntary Self-Exclusion of Gamblers and the Law-Suits against Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation

Review Paper

Abstract

Legalized gambling in Canada is governed by Provincial legislation. In Ontario, the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation is responsible for all aspects of gambling in the Province. There have been a number of recent lawsuits against this Crown agency of the Government of Ontario by gamblers, most of which have been settled or otherwise resolved. A recent class-action lawsuit on behalf of thousands of Ontario gamblers against this agency raises a number of interesting questions regarding the issue of responsibility and liability. The questions surround the issue of self-exclusionary practices of gamblers who deem themselves in need of external intervention in order interesting questions regarding the issue of responsibility and liability. The questions surround the issue to abstain from further gambling. A contract is voluntarily signed by the self-excluding gamblers whereby their further attendance at gaming venues is prevented and could be punishable by law. Where the gaming venues have failed to enforce the terms of this contract, gamblers have continued to gamble at these establishments. The class-action lawsuit stems from the grievances of these self-excluded gamblers who were not turned away. Relevant psychological theories and recent findings pertaining to gambling are reviewed and questions relevant to these grievances are discussed in favor of government responsibility and liability toward gamblers.

Keywords

Problem gambling Self-exclusion Psychological theories 

References

  1. Adida, M., Clark, L., Pomietto, P., Kaladjian, A., Besnier, N., Azorin, J.-M., et al. (2008). Lack of insight may predict impaired decision making in manic patients. Bipolar Disorder, 10, 829–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alberta Gaming Research Institute. (2008). Gambling News.Google Scholar
  3. Delfabbro, P. (2004). The stubborn logic of regular gamblers: Obstacles and dilemmas in cognitive gambling research. Journal of Gambling Studies, 20, 1–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dickerson, M., Hinchey, J., & Fabre, J. (1987). Chasing, arousal and sensation seeking in off-course gamblers. British Journal of Addiction, 82, 673–680.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dickerson, M., & O’Connor, J. (2006). Gambling as an addictive behaviour: impaired control, harm minimisation, treatment and prevention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. el-Guebaly, N., Patten, D., Currie, S., Williams, J. V. A., Beck, C., Maxwell, C. J., et al. (2006). Epidemiological associations between gambling behavior, substance use & mood and anxiety disorders. Journal of Gambling Studies, 22, 275–287.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ferland, F., Fournier, P.-M., Ladouceur, R., Brochu, P., Bouchard, M., & Paquet, L. (2008). Consequences of pathological gambling on the gambler and his spouse. Journal of Gambling Issues, 219–229. http://www.camh.net/egambling/.
  8. Goodie, A. S. (2005). The role of perceived control and overconfidence in pathological gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 21, 481–503.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grinols, E. L. (2004). Gambling in America: Costs and benefits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Gupta, R., & Derevensky, J. (1998). An empirical examination of Jacob’s general theory of addictions: Do adolescent gamblers fit the theory? Journal of Gambling Studies, 14, 17–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hardoon, K. K., Gupta, R., & Derevensky, J. (2004). Psychosocial variables associated with adolescent gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 18, 170–179.Google Scholar
  12. Haruvy, E., Erev, I., & Sonsino, D. (2001). The medium prizes paradox: Evidence from a simulated casino. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 3, 251–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ladouceur, R., Gaboury, A., Dumont, M., & Rochette, P. (1988). Gambling: Relationship between the frequency of wins and irrational thinking. Journal of Psychology, 122, 409–414.Google Scholar
  14. Ladouceur, R., Jacques, C., Giroux, I., Ferland, F., & Leblond, J. (2000). Analysis of a casino’s self-exclusion program. Journal of Gambling Studies, 16, 453–460.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ladouceur, R., Sylvain, C., & Gosselin, P. (2007). Self-exclusion program: A longitudinal evaluation study. Journal of Gambling Studies, 23, 85–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. MacDonald, M., McMullan, J. L., & Perrier, D. C. (2004). Gambling households in Canada. Journal of Gambling Studies, 20, 187–236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morse, J., & Fancy, H. (2008). Class Proceedings: Peter Aubrey Dennis and Zubin Phiroze Noble vs. The Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation. cv-08-00356378-0000.Google Scholar
  18. Napolitano, F. (2003). The self-exclusion program: Legal and clinical considerations. Journal of Gambling Studies, 19, 303–315.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nowatzki, N. R., & Williams, R. J. (2002). Casino self-exclusion programs: A review of the issues. International Gambling Studies, 2, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nower, L., & Blaszczynski, A. (2006). Characteristics and gender differences among self-excluded casino problem gamblers: Missouri data. Journal of Gambling Studies, 22, 81–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nower, L., & Blaszczynski, A. (2008). Characteristics of problem gamblers 56 years of age or older: A statewide study of casino self-excluders. Psychology and Aging, 23, 577–584.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Petry, N. M. (2005). Pathological gambling: etiology, comorbidity, and treatment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Reith, G. (2008). Reflections on responsibility. Journal of Gambling Issues, 149–155. http://www.camh.net/egambling/.
  24. Responsible Gambling Council. (2008). From enforcement to assistance: Evolving best practices in self-exclusion. Google Scholar
  25. Rush, B. R., Bassani, D. G., Urbanoski, K. A., & Castel, S. (2008). Influence of co-occuring mental and substance use disorders on the prevalence of problem gambling in Canada. Addiction, 103, 1847–1856.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behaviour. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Statistics Canada. (2003). Fighting the odds: Perspectives on labour and income. [75-001-XIE]. Canada, Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
  28. Statistics Canada. (2007). Perspectives on labour and income (Rep. No. 75-001-XIE).Google Scholar
  29. Toneatto, T. (2002). Cognitive therapy for problem gambling. Cogntive and Behavioral Practice, 9, 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Townshend, P. (2007). Self-exclusion in a public health environment: An effective treatment option in New Zealand. International Journal of Mental Health Addiction, 5, 390–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tremblay, N., Boutin, C., & Ladouceur, R. (2008). Improved self-exclusion program: Preliminary results. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24, 505–518.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wiebe, J., Single, E., & Falkowski-Ham, A. (2001). Measuring gambling and problem gambling in Ontario Canadian Centre on substance abuse. Ontario: Responsible Gambling Council.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations