The year 2010 marked the first publication assessing the long-term outcomes for self-excluded casino gamblers. Nelson et al. interviewed 113 people who had self-excluded from Missouri's casinos four-to-ten years earlier. (Missouri's self-exclusion program involves a lifetime ban.) Once again, self-exclusion looks to be a very effective tool for helping problem gamblers control their wagering -- though most continued to gamble in some form (including lotteries) and at some non-Missouri or non-casino locales. Only 18 of the 113 disassociated people attempted to gamble in Missouri casinos after the ban, and nine of those managed to get away with it on one or more occasions. Two-thirds of participants were quite satisfied with the self-exclusion program. Most had not gambled at all in the six months prior to the interview, and of those who had gambled, their gambling problems tended to be significantly alleviated compared with their pre-exclusion situation. Even the haphazardly enforced Missouri self-exclusion program appears to offer significant benefits to most people who choose to take advantage of it.
Previous posts in this series:
Does Casino Self-Exclusion Work? (III)
Does Casino Self-Exclusion Work? (II)
Does Casino Self-Exclusion Work? (I)
And one subsequent post:
Does Casino Self-Exclusion Work? (V)