nomorebets.myfreeforum.org This site is intended to provide a forum for people who want to stop gambling and stay stopped. It has information for people in crisis, and for recovering gamblers seeking community.
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:10 am Post subject: Gambling Activism/Government Responsibility
ADDICTION FED BY DECEPTION
Gambling addiction research has found many links to problem gambling including the players’ own genetic, biological and psychological makeup. However, recent research is showing that 20%+ of all problem gamblers don’t have pre-existing genetic, biological or psychosocial problem before they started gambling. Their problems are a direct result of being increasingly exposed to the endless gambling expansion by our governments and the conditioning produced by gambling promotion, gaming environments and the machines themselves! Many “normal” people are needlessly falling victim to our governments exploiting their own citizens mostly through EGMs that facilitate loss of control by the very nature of their design. Players are then labeled pathological and blamed for responding the way everything is designed to get them to respond, which is to play, play, play.
Our government and gambling industry tells us that the ultimate responsibility rests with the players themselves and the choices they make gambling. They’re told to “know your limit, play within it” and to treat gambling as another form of “entertainment”. Even our children are now being taught “responsible gaming” strategies in our schools. They’re not being taught about the concealed properties of the machines that are inherently addictive and dangerous. This all ignores the truth about gambling.
Over the past 20 years there has been a concerted effort to promote and expand EGMs worldwide while particular care has been given to give all gambling stakeholders the impression that they are in a position of choice, to which criteria of rational action apply. But these seemingly rational decisions invariably profits the gambling industry at the expense of others.
The gambling industry achieves their aims by ensuring always that their ‘victims’ are placed in situations of choice. Not just any choice, but a carefully engineered choices in which the alternative to doing that which benefits the gambling industry is seen to be unreasonable or irrational, even dangerous by the individual (and sadly, by politicians and bureaucrats too). The choices they offer are “either / or” choices that totally ignore the multitude of other options available to the individual or government representative.
For example, the choices offered to individuals - when you are out for the night, you can gamble and maybe bring home more money than you left home with or you can go out to tea and come home with no money. When out for the night with friends, you can gamble or you can sit around watching everyone else winning money and having fun. You can try your luck or you can continue to work hard for every dollar you get. You can play the slots or you can sit at home being bored. Given the choices offered, which choice is the more reasonable / rational one the individual can make? The choice to gamble!
Choices offered to politicians – you can continue to struggle financially or you can bring money into the states economy by encouraging tourists to come here by building hotels and casinos. You can keep your outdated gambling laws as they are and run the risk that criminals will operate illegal gambling rackets OR you can update you laws and make licensing of gambling operations mandatory. You can resist building casinos and racinos or you can continue to watch neighboring states get rich on the money your citizens gamble away. You can raise personal taxes and piss off the voters or you can introduce a gambling tax and make a bucket load of money. Given that the consequences of each option are presented as black and white, either / or situations, how can politicians not choose to allow casino’s and liberalize gambling laws?
Choices offered all businesses that begin struggling the moment gambling laws are liberalized – you can close up shop or you can push the government to allow you to have slot machines / VLT’s / poker machines.
In all cases, the final decision and the responsibility for any negative outcomes are left to the individual. No one notices who is very carefully pushing the need to choose. No one notices that the only rational choice is one that benefits the gambling industry. No one notices the options very carefully not mentioned OR that the beneficial consequences are not written in stone. No one notices until the damage is done.
The unwritten rule of the gambling industry of the late 20th and early 21st century seems to be:
“At all times politicians and gambling customers must be led to the making of conscious, rational and seemingly freely chosen decisions in such a way that the wisest choice they can make is the one which furthers the aims and objectives of the gambling industry – which is to make money unfettered without responsibility entailed in the decision-making of it or the detrimental consequences of excessive gambling”.
“It is an unethical abuse of the idea of choice”
“Take state-run gambling, the most stealth – like of taxes. Today our governments take in $11.3 billion in revenues. Four times more than a decade ago. Ontario, Quebec and Alberta are the leaders. Alberta alone has a net annual profit from gambling of $1 billion dollars. This rivals oil revenues. And Alberta has the highest per capita spending on gambling – $604.
Well, some say, that's free choice. Leave us alone.
Well, I would reply, that completely misses the point.
Right across Canada, the point is the same. Public officials are spending millions, tens of millions of dollars on slick advertising to seduce citizens into gambling and gambling more. If citizens wish to gamble, that is their privilege. But for governments to set out to use the tools of the public good to corrupt citizens; that is quite another matter. . This advertising is aimed at the poorer, who pay less under normal taxation rules. It is aimed at those most likely to be seduced; that is, most experts point out a link between gambling and depression. And a link between depression and suicide.
The idea that public money would then be spent to deal with gambling addictions, and the awful results, such as suicide, simply adds insult to injury. It means that a bit of public money will be spent to try to undo some of the damage that gambling, created by public money, itself has created.
And handing over 15 to 20% of these gambling profits to charities is precisely aimed at silencing the very organizations in society most likely to raise ethical concerns.”
Excerpts from:
His Excellency John Ralston Saul Remarks Made During the Conferral of an Honorary Degree from the University of Calgary
Calgary, Alberta
November 10, 2003
The Addiction Deception
This has been carefully designed and managed with the gambling industry embracing and funding an addiction paradigm that places blame and responsibility on the victims for excessive gambling. Responsible gaming strategies and messages focus on telling the public and players that gambling is simply another entertainment choice and they need to set and keep to responsible expenditures like any other entertainment purchase or there’ll be negative consequences. The wisest choice is to play responsibility. If you cannot, then you must be sick, flawed or pathological. The gambling industry likes to say, “For most people gaming is fun and entertaining, but for some - around 2 to 4% (general population figures, not the up to 60%+ with problems who play EGMs) - gambling can become an addiction.” This causes problem players to hide away in their shame and guilt. Only in this way will the blame for any negative consequence that follows the making of the engineered decision be laid at the feet of the ones seen to have made a decision, not at feet of the one who engineered it! Only in this way will the gambling industry be seen as anything but simple businessmen and women offering a legal product to willing purchasers. Individuals led in the making of decisions in this way do not blame the ones who manipulate them. They blame themselves. The manipulators not having made the final choice, is seen to be innocent of all wrongdoing. The addiction designation covers-up the deception and exploitation nicely.
You’re Being Conditioned – Choice Is Effectively Being Taking Away
Sue Pinkerton – one time problem gambler turned Problem Gambling Research Consultant - sums it up nicely:
“As an ex problem gambler who has studied EGM addiction extensively since I quit gambling some five years ago, it has come to my attention that most people don’t appear to understand anything about the level of commitment and strength of will it takes to overcome the conditioning process and the urges electronic gambling machines evoke in problem gamblers.
To help you understand, I would like you, the reader, to consider what inner strength and level of self control it would take for you to have to resist - from now until eternity - the urge to pass urine in a toilet every time your bladder was full.
Consider that instead of going to the bathroom in response to the urgings of your bladder, you had to wet yourself or face a tirade of harsh criticism and threats from those nearest and dearest to you.
How hard would that be for you? What fears and resistances would have to do that that evoke in you? What self-control would it take and how anxious would you feel each time your bladder filled? How afraid would you be that in a distracted moment you might forget and pee in the toilet?
Now consider this fact taught to first year psychology students - EGM's condition human behaviour by EXACTLY the same processes by which we are all toilet trained. For the problem gambler, it's as hard a behaviour to control or change as our toilet training is - if not harder, because EGM conditioning, unlike toilet training, continues to reinforce gambling behaviour over an extended period of time - long after the awareness that we actually have a choice - to perform or not - has been lost and long after any association between urge and action has likewise been lost.
To become addicted to EGM’s does not require an individual to have a pre-existing genetic or psychological disturbance any more than these make successful toilet training any more likely. EGM addiction can happen to any one who can learn…it can happen to any one who can be trained. Deconditioning – the procedure of extinguishing a conditioned behaviour - takes commitment, time and support, but it can happen.”
EGM conditioning starts with the promotion and framing of gambling as merely entertainment. This is intended to lull an uninformed and unsuspecting public into believing there’s little or no risks involved. It’s part of concealing the addictive and dangerous attributes of the machines. Once everyone was lead to believe that EGMs, especially slots, were safe and good for you, the negative consequences needed to be placed on the players to continue the deception and fraud. What better than to call excessive and out-of-control gambling an addiction wherein the player is flawed and held responsible. Nowhere is it called a “conditioned response” to gambling expansion, promotion, availability and machine programming. But as we now know, EGMs employ very powerful illusions and addictive processes to get you playing and keep you playing that causes many “normal” people to lose control. Problem gambling is fed by deception.
Addiction to gambling revenues has also being fed by deception. Our governments, treatment and prevention sectors, gambling operators and regulators are all colluding (intentionally or not) in this massive deception that was engineered to make everyone believe they possessed choice and free will while all outcomes are designed to benefit the gambling industry at the expense of the people. These are crimes intended to exploit how we all think and make decisions, knowing we want positive outcomes for all. This is the greatest fraud of the 21st Century and our politicians are now responsible for perpetuating it! They can no longer deny that they too were duped into making choices with outcomes that are cleverly engineered to benefit the gaming industry and exploit our citizens. They’re now part of a worldwide scheme of deception and fraud!
Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 9:50 pm Post subject: Is problem gambling an addiction?
Is problem gambling an addiction?
By Cynthia J. Orme, M.A.
Director of Clinical Services
The Problem Gambling Foundation New Zealand
Although problems with gambling have been around for as long as there has been gambling, the first attempts to address the problem in a less judgmental way was in California in 1957 when two men got together for the first Gamblers Anonymous meeting, based on Alcoholics Anonymous. The first GA meeting in New Zealand was in Christchurch in 1978.
In 1980 pathological gambling was officially included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) III, listing it under Impulse Control Disorders, along with trichotilamania, pyromania, kleptomania and intermittent explosive disorder.
Although the diagnostic criteria for pathological gambling reads more like substance-related disorders than impulse control disorders, it would seem that it was categorized as an impulse control disorder instead because it doesn’t have the ingestion of an exogenous substance associated with it. Even though problem gambling is listed as an impulse control disorder, clinicians generally treat it as they would a substance abuse disorder.
Even though “addiction” is a commonly used term, what it actually means is open to debate in the scientific literature. The term “addiction” had originally been used only in relation to the abuse of substances, but it has now come to be used to describe a range of behaviours, such as eating, shopping, nothing, sports, television, internet and computer use, exercise, work, love and gambling. These are variously called process, activity or behavioural addictions.
The World Health Organisation definition of addiction is:
“A state, psychic and sometimes also physical, resulting in the interaction between a living organism and a drug, characterized by behavioural and other responses that always include a compulsion to take the drug on a continuous or periodic basis in order to experience its psychic effects, and sometimes to avoid the discomfort of its absence. Tolerance may or may not be present.” (WHO Technical Report Series no. 407, Geneva, 1969).
The medical model, which replaced the moral model, defines addiction as chronic, progressive, uncontrollable and situated in the individual. Although the medical model represented a step forward from viewing the effected individual as morally deficient, this model has a narrow and myopic focus which doesn’t look beyond the individual . The medical model recognises that others are also affected by the gambling behaviour, but doesn’t extend much beyond that. The onus for change sits squarely on the shoulders of the individual.
Although the literature would locate problem gambling as an addictive behaviour, PGF believes that using the medical or addiction model pathologises and blames the individual without considering the social context in which problems with gambling develop.
The Tattersalls (2002) report is a striking example of the industry’s efforts to understand what makes gamblers tick so that they can capitalize on it, which makes it amazing that more people don’t fall prey to gambling problems.
The report says that:
“Research has consistently shown a positive relationship between the availability of gambling resources and both regular and significant gambling behaviour.
Whenever new forms of gambling are introduced, or existing forms become more readily available there is an increase in gambling, suggesting that the demand for gambling products is closely linked to their supply.
The more gambling industry infrastructure that is established (e.g. new venues) the larger the range of gambling products (e.g. the application of new technologies), the greater the industry’s marketing efforts, the more likely people will be to begin gambling……” (p. 4).
The late Dr. Jonathan Mann, Director of the World Health Organisation AIDS Programme, said that the way you define a problem will determine what you do about it. Using a public health model for working with people affected by gambling recognises that anyone could be vulnerable to such problems. It also recognises that gambling problems develop in a wider social context.
The messages that the public receives about gambling, or “gaming” as the industry euphemistically prefers to call it, tend to be positive and certainly don’t carry warnings about the potential for harm or even accurate information about the actual odds of winning. “You know the odds, now beat them.” What could be easier? What could be more tempting?
Why use a public health model?
A public health model focuses on building resilience in individuals and communities in a way which is proactive rather than reactive.
According to Korn and Shaffer (1999), “Unlike narrower clinical models of gambling, a public health perspective addresses all levels of prevention as well as treatment and rehabilitation issues. It promotes the welfare of individuals by fostering health, strong and safe families, communities, and workplaces. It views the individual within a social milieu and explores the influence of cultural, family, and community values on behavior. It looks not only at the behavior of individuals but at organizational and political behavior….It views behaviors along a health-related continuum (i.e., health enhancing or illness producing, rather than as the sick/well dichotomy of health care practice)……A public health vantage point encourages the application of a conceptual continuum to the range of risk, resiliency, and protective factors that can influence the development and maintenance of gambling-related problems. A public health perspective also offers an integrated dynamic approach that emphasizes a ‘systems’ view rather than a primary focus solely on individuals or isolated events” (p.306).
Problems with gambling effects not just individuals, but families, the workplace, the health care system, the legal system, the criminal justice system and society as a whole.
People who experience problems with gambling have more stress-related illnesses than the general population, such as ulcers, colitis, high blood pressure, heart disease, migraines and skin problems. Studies suggest that between 10 – 30% of people who gamble have been involved in gambling-related criminal activities ranging from embezzlement, cheque forgery, stealing credit cards, tax evasion, fencing stolen goods, insurance fraud, bookmaking, employee theft to prostitution, theft and drug trafficking.
In a study by Shaffer (2003), The National Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC) “estimated that the annual cost for problem and pathological gamblers is $5 billion (U.S.) per year and an additional $40 billion in lifetime costs for productivity reductions, social services, and creditor losses” (p. 22). Problems of such magnitude could hardly be addressed by the medical model.
Given the costs to society that accrue with the growth of the gambling industry, moving to a public health model allows PGF to re-evaluate and refine our methods of working with people whose lives have been touched by gambling as well as taking a position of advocacy.
References
American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders –IV (Washington:APA).
Korn, D. & Shaffer, H. (1999). Gambling and the health of the public: Adopting a public health perspective. Journal of Gambling Studies, 15:4, 289 – 365.
Shaffer, H.J. (2003). A public health perspective on gambling: The four principles. AGA Responsible Gaming Lecture Series, 2:1, 1 - 27.
Woollard, S. & Gregory, D. (2002). Market research briefing. Tattersalls.
Posted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 10:52 pm Post subject: Excellent Protest in SA!!
Protest Held In Gambling Venue, Adelaide, SA
Duty of Care protesters targeted a gaming machine venue in Adelaide in protest against government failure to protect communities from the harmful impact of gaming machines.
The protest involved 20 Duty of Care supporters each of whom sat at a gaming machine and considered for two hours how best to spend their hard earned money. Each person placed one dollar in a machine, and collected their dollar at the end of two hours. The protest was held at the Arkaba Hotel in Fullarton. Group organizers said they wanted to raise awareness about the government’s inaction, particularly in not following the recommendations of the IGA regarding smart cards.
Also present at the sit-in were Nick Xenophon MLC, Fiona Barr (Mayor Port Adelaide), John Stansfield (CEO, NZ Problem Gambling Foundation) and Duty of Care members who were attending the International Pokies Impact Conference, held in the Unley Town Hall on 14th & 15th November. Protesters asked gaming room staff questions relating to gaming venue Codes of Practice and discovered that gaming room staff were not fully conversant with consumer rights and venue operator responsibilities as described in the Codes.
When asked by one protester for a copy of the Codes of Practice, the gaming room manager was unable to locate a copy within the venue as required by law. "Senior government MP's talk about their deep concern over the impact gaming machines have on people in our communities, but when given the opportunity to hear the latest research and advice of those who work with those who are devastated by gaming machine addiction, they simply don't want to know" Ms Pinkerton said.
Just one MP has agreed to attend the conference. Even the Minister for Gambling, Michael Wright, sent his apologies claiming he was too busy to attend the two-day event. Sue Pinkerton (Secretary, Duty of Care) said, "80% of SA adults want gaming machines removed and we're here today to let the government know we've had enough of being ignored".
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
