The Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board wants to change a rule allowing people back into casinos after a self-imposed ban expires
More than 40 people including addictions professionals and the Pennsylvania Office of Drug and Alcohol Programs are pressing state leaders not to change a rule that would make it easier for problem bettors to return to casinos.
The state Gaming Control Board accepted public comment until Monday, Nov. 25, on whether to change the voluntary casino ban process for problem gamblers.
No one spoke in support of the change.
Representatives for three casinos also weighed in, advocating for measures designed to better identify people who are not permitted in casinos under the state's self-exclusion rules.
“Automatically removing an individual from a self-exclusion list, without them requesting it, may lead to relapse from problem gambling recovery,” wrote Amy R. Hubbard, a drug and alcohol program manager in the state’s Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs, in the public comments. “Relapse from a gambling disorder can be devastating and leads to problems with finances, relationships, legal conflicts, and even suicidal ideation.”
The proposed change, which would make removal from the casino ban list automatic, has prompted backlash from experts across the state. Currently, problem gamblers must remove themselves from the list after their self-exclusion period is up.
It isn’t clear when the state Gaming Control Board will make a decision. The board enforces gaming laws and licenses casinos.
Also opposing the change: The Pennsylvania Association of Addictions Professionals, the National Association of Administrators for Disordered Gambling Services, as well as Josh Ercole, executive director of the Council on Compulsive Gambling of PA.
Ercole’s organization handles thousands of phone calls annually from people seeking help.
Jody Bechtold, a gambling addictions expert and CEO of The Better Institute, created a petition opposing the change and shared it with the clinical professionals, generating public comments from licensed professionals across the state.
The petition laid out four bulleted points of concern about the proposed change: “increased risk of relapse,” “burden on individuals,” “contradicts consumer protection”and “potential for tragic consequences.”
The proposed change is to make the removal process consistent with self-exclusion for other forms of gambling such as online — all of which currently have automatic removals after a self-imposed ban on specific types of gambling has expired.
Presently, after an individual’s ban has expired for casino gambling, that person must request removal before they can legally enter a casino.
That sometimes leads to confusion, officials say. Individuals sometimes enter casinos after their self-exclusion period is up without realizing they are still legally banned, said Doug Harbach, communications director for the Gaming Control Board. This may lead to the individual being charged with trespassing.
“When someone signs up for one of the self-exclusion lists, while our staff will go through a lot of details on this and interview them, it's a stressful time for that person,” Harbach said. "They're hearing everything, but sometimes they're not hearing everything. So that's taken into account on why some people may overlook the fact that this is not an automatic removal for them.”
But to Bechtold, that threat of legal trouble is why self-exclusion functions effectively.
“We never sign a legal document giving people permission to arrest us, and that's really what self-exclusion is,” Bechtold said. "That's what people know and often are grateful for, because it's enough of a deterrent when they have that impulsive thought that maybe they could go gamble.”
One of the few comments from someone outside the gambling treatment industry came from Joan Bouchard, 82, of State College. She that that self-exclusion can help people stay out of casinos.
The change means someone could “on the spur of the moment” decide to gamble again, Bouchard said.
“Gamblers are notoriously addictive, and they're notoriously recognized for being very quick to take the wrong decision,” she said. “I know how gamblers think, and this would mean there would be a lot more gamblers.”
Abigail Hakas is a student journalist at Next Generation Newsroom, part of the Center for Media Innovation at Point Park University. Reach her at abigail.hakas@pointpark.edu. NGN is a regional news service that focuses on government and enterprise reporting in Southwestern Pennsylvania. Find out more information on foundation and corporate funders here.
