games people play - publications · 2018. 11. 10. · 6 games people play help seeking the vast...

Games People Play -Problem gambling among offenders in Queensland Community Corrections

�Problem gambling among offenders in Queensland Community Corrections

Contents

Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 1. Introduction–Problemgambling,crimeandtheQueensland Department of Corrective Services ........................................................... 1.1 The Government response ................................................. 1.2 Problem gambling and Queensland Corrections .................. 1.� The Community Corrections Problem Gambling

Prevalence Survey 2004 ....................................................

2. Methodology .......................................................................................... 2.1 Introduction ...................................................................... 2.2 The Canadian Problem Gambling Index .............................. 2.� Survey instrument ............................................................. 2.4 Participants and participation rates ................................... 2.5 Statisticalsignificance....................................................... 2.6 Creation of variables .......................................................... 2.7 Region coding ................................................................... 2.8 Weighting .......................................................................... 2.9 General information on output tables ................................ 3. Queensland Community Corrections problem gambling prevalence

survey2004—results ............................................................................. �.1 Representative validity of the sample ................................ �.2 Prevalence and gambling types ......................................... �.� Socio-demographic comparisons ....................................... �.4 Gambling and behavioural issues ......................................

4. Indigenous and regional issues ............................................................... 4.1 Indigenous variants ........................................................... 4.2 Regional variants ...............................................................

References ..............................................................................................Appendix A Community Corrections/Custodial Corrections

gambling type comparisons .............................................. Appendix B Survey instrument .............................................................

5

778

10

11111111121�1�1�1�1�

1515151620

272729

�1

�2�6

4 Games People Play

List of figures

Figure 1 Gambling prevalence across Community Corrections, prison and general Queensland population ................................................................................................

Figure 2 Did adults in the family gamble by gambling group ........................................................Figure 3 Age of first gambling experience by gambling group ......................................................Figure 4 Employment by gambling group ....................................................................................Figure 5 Income by gambling group ............................................................................................Figure 6 Education level by gambling group ................................................................................Figure 7 Perceptions of increased likelihood of gambling winnings ..............................................Figure 8 All gambling activities by gambling group ......................................................................Figure 9 Game played most often by gambling group ...................................................................Figure 10 Frequency of play by gambling group .............................................................................Figure 11 Average time spent in hours each time game played by gambling group .........................Figure 12 Expenditure per session by gambling group ...................................................................Figure 13 Help sources by gambling group ....................................................................................Figure 14 Willingness to access free gambling help program by gambling group ...........................Figure 15 Self perception of depression in Community Corrections and the general population

by gambling group ........................................................................................................Figure 16 Alcohol and drug use and influence of gambling activity by gambling group ...................Figure 17 Gambling-related offences ‘anytime’ and ‘current’ by gambling group ............................Figure 18 Gambling activity by Indigenous status ..........................................................................

List of tables

Table 1 Types of gambling-related crime ....................................................................................Table 2 CPGI gambling group .....................................................................................................Table 3 Offices surveyed according to region ..............................................................................Table 4 Representative validity of the sample ..............................................................................Table 5 CPGI gambling types: community, prison and general population comparisons ...............Table 6 Unpartnered by gambling group ....................................................................................Table 7 Gambling of partner by gambling group .........................................................................Table 8 Gambling and household arguments by gambling group ................................................Table 9 Non cash gambling stakes .............................................................................................Table 10 Self exclusion from gaming venue by gambling group ....................................................Table 11 Percentage who have not sought help with gambling in past 12 months ..........................Table 12 Indigenous, non-Indigenous gambling prevalence comparison by gambling group ........Table 13 Community Corrections gambling prevalence remote Indigenous communities ...............Table 14 Demographic profile of non-gambling group ..................................................................Table 15 Demographic profile of recreational gambler group ........................................................Table 16 Demographic profile of low risk gambler group ...............................................................Table 17 Demographic profile of moderate risk gambler group .....................................................Table 18 Demographic profile of problem risk gambler group .......................................................

911121515181818222�2�2728�2�2��4�4

51717191920202021212122242525

252627

5Problem gambling among offenders in Queensland Community Corrections

Prevalence

The 2004 problem gambling survey conducted among offenders on Community Corrections orders in Queensland found that:

• 9.4percentofthesample,whichrepresents1123peoplewithintheCommunityCorrectionspopulation,experienceproblemgambling.Thisfigureisapproximately17timesthatofthegeneralpopulation.

• Afurther12.3percentofthesample,representing1475peoplewithintheCommunityCorrectionspopulation,experiencemoderateriskgamblingbehaviour.Thesepeopleexperiencesomenegativeimpactsofgamblingandmaybeatriskofbecomingproblemgamblers.

Thecombinedproblemgamblingandmoderateriskgroupscomprise21.7percentofthesampleandrepresent2598peoplecurrentlywithintheCommunityCorrectionssystemwhopotentiallyhaveseriousgamblingproblemsandwhomaybenefitfromtherapeuticintervention.

Executive summary

Community Corrections

Prison

General population

Non gambling

Recreatio

nal gamblin

g

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gamblin

g

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

�0%

20%

10%

0%

15.1

8.4

19.7

51

48.�

72.4

12.21�.5

5.�

12.� 12.4

2

9.4

0.5

17.4

Gambling activity

Nearlyallproblemgamblersplayelectronicgamingmachines(94%)andsignificantnumbersalsoplayScratch-Its(63%),Keno(56%),GoldLotto(53%)andon/offcoursebetting(40%).Problemgamblersgambletwotofivetimesaweekandarelikelytospendupwardsoffourhoursandover$60persession.

Links to criminal behaviour

Forty-one per cent of problem gamblers have committed gambling-related offences as have 17 per cent of moderateriskgamblersand11percentoflowriskgamblers.Interestingly,over8percentor150offendersinthe non-gambling group also have a gambling-related criminal history.

Figure 1 Gambling prevalence across Community Corrections, prison and general Queensland populations

6 Games People Play

Help seeking

Thevastmajority(86%)ofproblemgamblershavenotsoughtanyhelpwiththeirgamblingproblems.Thisisconsistentwithexternalresearchshowingthatgamblersprefertodealwiththeproblemontheirown.Significantly,theGamblingHelpServicesarethemostlikelyexternalservicetobeaccessedbyproblemgamblers.CommunityCorrectionsOfficersareanothergrouplikelytobeaccessedforhelpwithgamblingproblems.

Associated issues

Nearly40percentoftheproblemgamblinggroupbegantogamblebetweentheagesof10and17.Eightyper cent of this group have experienced depression in the past year and 8� per cent have used alcohol or drugswhilegamblinginthepastyear.Thisisthehighestpercentageofanygroupforbothdepressionandsubstanceuseandindicatesthatgambling-relatedinterventionswillalsoneedtoaddressbroadercomorbidityissues.

Indigenous issues

The prevalence of problem gambling among Indigenous respondents is 1�.7 per cent compared to 8.4 per cent for non-Indigenous respondents and 0.5 per cent for the general Queensland population. Indigenous moderate riskprevalenceis17percentcomparedto11.3percentforthenon-Indigenouscohortand2percentforthegeneral population.

Theimpactof“cardschools”inremoteIndigenouscommunitiesappearstoberesultinginalowprevalenceofrecreationalgambling(25%)andaveryhighprevalenceofmoderateriskgambling(33.3%)inthosecommunities.


Introduction – Problem gambling, crime and the Queensland Department of Corrective Services

While the vast majority of Queenslanders enjoy gambling as a harmless social or recreational activity there remainsasmallbutsignificantnumberofpeoplewhoexperienceseriousdifficultiesinmanagingtheirgambling behaviour1.Thesepeopleusuallybetmorethantheycanafford,loseheavily,chasetheirlosses,andoften admit a need to bet increasing amounts of money in order to maintain the same feeling of excitement. Mostimportantly,theyarelikelytohavelostcontroloftheirgamblingbehaviour2. Importantly for the DepartmentofCorrectiveServices,problemgamblingisincreasinglybeingrevealedasacontributingfactorincriminal behaviour.

1.1 The Government response

Inresponsetogrowingpublicconcernregardingthenegativeimpactsofgambling,theQueenslandGovernment released the Queensland Responsible Gambling Strategy outlining its approach to minimising the harmcausedbytheadverseeffectsofgamblingwhilestillallowingaccesstowhatisalegitimaterecreationalactivity for most Queenslanders�.TheStrategyoutlinesprevention,protectionandrehabilitationinitiativestominimisetheprevalenceandimpactofproblemgamblingandtoprovidepathwaysofassistanceforthoseaffectedbythenegativeimpactsofgaming.TheStrategy’ssixpriorityactionareasaimto:

1. Enhanceresponsiblegamblingpoliciesandprogramsthroughresearch

2. Increasecommunityknowledgeandawarenessoftheimpactsofgambling

3. Reducetheriskfactorsforproblemgamblingthroughearlyintervention

4. Developastatewidesystemofproblemgamblingtreatmentandsupportservices

5. Ensuregamblingenvironmentsaresaferandmoresupportiveforconsumers

6. Promotepartnershipstoaddressstatewideandlocalgamblingissuesandconcerns

InlinewithPriorityActionArea4theQueenslandGovernmentcreatedastatewidesystemofproblemgamblingtreatmentsupportservicesbydevelopingandexpandingtheexistingGovernmentfundedGamblingHelpservices.

GamblingHelpbeganoperatingunderthebannerofBreakEvenin1993providingsupportforpeopleadverselyaffectedbygambling.By2001thereweresixserviceswithintheQueenslandBreakEvennetworklocatedin:

• Brisbane

• GoldCoast

• Toowoomba

• Rockhampton

• Townsville,and

• Cairns

In2002,asakeythrustoftheQueenslandResponsibleGamblingStrategytheQueenslandGovernmentcommittedanadditional$11millionovertheensuingthreeyears.Utilisingthisfunding,BreakEven(renamedGamblingHelp)wasexpandedfromtheoriginalsixservicestoinclude:

• CabooltureandRedcliffe

• Ipswich

• MackayandWhitsunday

• MtIsa

• SunshineCoast,and

• WideBayandBurnett

1 Queensland Household Gambling Survey 2001(QHGS),(2002)QueenslandTreasury,2 2 Ibid. 12 3 Queensland Responsible Gambling Strategy,(2002)QueenslandTreasury.

8 Games People Play

Nowwith12regionalservices,GamblingHelpisatrulystatewidenetworkdeliveredinapartnershipbetweenthe Queensland Government and a range of respected community organisations including Relationships Australia,Centacare,LifelineandInterlock(adivisionoftheAlcoholandDrugFoundationQueensland).

Theadditionofthetelephonecounsellingservice,GamblingHelpLine,createda24-hourpoint-of-entryforthoseseekinghelpwithgamblingproblems.FundingwasalsomadeavailabletotheSalvationArmy’sMoonyahRehabilitationServicefortheprovisionofacounsellortoworkwithinboththeinpatientandoutpatientprogrammesattheirRedHillserviceinBrisbane.

TheseinitiativesensuredthatcounsellingandsupportservicesareplacedwithineasyreachofthemajorityofpeopleinQueenslandwithneedofthem.

1.2 Problem gambling and Queensland Corrections

In 2002 the Queensland Department of Corrective Services conducted a problem gambling prevalence survey amongtheState’sprisonpopulation.Onehundredandseventy-eightinterviewswereconductedoutofatotal prison population of �760. The research found that the incidence of problem gambling among the prison populationwasupto20timeshigherthanforthegeneralpopulation4. Some 17.4 per cent of those tested usingtheCanadianProblemGamblingIndex(CPGI)wereidentifiedasproblemgamblers,withafurther12.4percentclassifiedasmoderaterisk,oreffectively‘atrisk’ofdevelopingproblemgamblingbehaviours5. This comparedwith0.83percentforthegeneralQueenslandpopulationaccordingtothemostrecenthouseholdgambling survey at that time6.Whetherthoseservingcustodialsentenceswereproblemgamblersuponconvictionorbecamesowhileinprisonisnotclear.Neitherisitclearhowmanyofthosedesignatedasproblemgamblerswereconvictedofgambling-relatedcrimes.Whatisknownisthat:

• 6.7percentofthosesurveyedadmittedtheircurrentoffendingrelatedtoaneedtofinancetheirgambling problem

• 7.3percentofthesampleadmittedtohavingbeenconvictedinthepastofanoffencethatwasrelatedto their gambling problem

• 12.4percentadmittedtohavingcommittedanoffence/offencesinthepastwithoutdetectioninordertofinancetheirgamblingproblem7

In spite of the fact that it is a breach of the Corrective Services Act 2000, 46.1 per cent of those surveyed admittedtogamblingwhileincustody8.

Themostprevalentcrimescommittedamongthisgroupwere:

• assault–38.2percent

• drugandalcoholrelated–28.7percent

• breakandenter–24.2percent

• robbery–21.9percent

• breachbail–20.2percent

• fraud–18percent

Reportedly,theprimarymotivationforaproblemgamblertocommitcrimeistofundtheirgamblingactivities9. Mostgambling-relatedoffencesareofthenatureoffinancialorpropertycrimesuchasfraud.However,astheCorrectiveServicesresearchnotedabove,othercrimesmayhavetheirgenesisinthegamblinghabitsoftheperpetrator.TheProductivityCommission’s1999reportnotedthat30to70percentofproblemgamblerscommitted offences.

4 Problem Gambling Prevalence Survey 2002, Department of Corrective Services 5 Ibid. 12-1� 6 QHGS,aboven1.ThecurrentresearchamongCommunityCorrectionsoffendersutilisesmoreup-to-dategeneralpopulationestimatesfrom 2005. 7 Above,n4,3.4 8 Ibid. 9 R.Doley,Want to make a Bet? Gambling and Crime in Australia,(2000)AustralianCentreforPolicingResearch,11


TheReportwentontoadd,

Someoftheproblemgamblerssurveyedwereresponsibleforupto1000actsoflarceny,600actsofembezzlement,250actsofbreakandenterand17actsofarmedrobbery10.

Table1belowshowsthetypesofcrimecommittedby306NewSouthWalesproblemgamblersassubmittedtothe Productivity Commission11.

Table 1 Types of gambling-related crime

OffenceNumber

committing offence

Total number of offences committed

Larceny 96 5�88

Embezzlement 66 �045

Misappropriation 20 1698

Breakandenter 16 760

Shop-lifting 1� 592

Armed robbery 8 42

Drug dealing 5 �15

Other 5 19

Theabovefiguressupporttheviewthatthemostcommonoffencesinvolvetheftofmoneybyactsof:

• larcenyortheft(committedby31%ofproblemgamblerssurveyed)

• embezzlement(committedby22%)

• misappropriation(committedby7%)

Othermoreviolentcrimessuchasbreakandenter,andarmedrobberywerecommittedmuchlessfrequently(by 5% and �% of problem gamblers respectively12).

Theaboveresearchwaslimitedtothoseproblemgamblerswhohadsoughtcounsellingfortheirgamblingproblems. More recent research has focussed on people found guilty of criminal offences by examining District andLocalcourtfilesinNSWfortheperiod1995to19991�. This study also concluded that the most common gambling-relatedcrimeswerefraudcommittedbyanemployeeagainsttheiremployer(19.7%)andpassingfalsecheques(19.4%)14.Inall,76percentofthosecasesidentifiedasbeinggambling-related,involvedfraud15.Ofthosefraudsperpetratedbyanemployeethetotalamountstolenwas$2,494,309withanaverageamountof$95,935peroffender16.Thestudyadmitshoweverthatmostfraudbyemployeesgoesunreportedandthereforethefullextentofthiscrime,anditslinkwithgambling,isunknown17.PricewaterhouseCoopersestimates that 2� per cent of all serious fraud18 inAustraliaismotivatedbygambling,makingitthesecondmost common motivator for fraud behind greed19.Ofthesegambling-relatedoffences28percentwereinaprofessionalrelationshipwiththevictim(eg.solicitor,taxagent)and46percenthadanemploymentrelationship20.

10 ProductivityCommission,1999,Australia’s Gambling Industries,ReportNo.10,Ausinfo,CanberraAppendixH18 11 Ibid.H17 12 Ibid 1� P.Crofts, Gambling and Criminal Behaviour. An Analysis of Local and District Court Files,(2002);P.Crofts,Researching the Link Between Gambling and Crime (2003)Paperpresentedto‘EvaluationinCrimeandJustice:TrendsandMethods’conference,AustralianInstituteof Criminology,Canberra24-25March2003.14 P.Crofts,Researching the Link Between Gambling and Crime,ibid,0415 P.Crofts,Gambling and Criminal Behaviour,aboven1316 Ibid.17 P.Crofts,Researching the Link Between Gambling and Crime,aboven13,0818 Seriousfraudisgenerallydefinedasinvolvingamountsofover$100,000unlessotherfactorsmadethecaseunusuallyseriousor complex.19 PricewaterhouseCoopersSerious Fraud in Australia and New Zealand,(2003)AustralianInstituteofCriminology,4420 Ibid.,40

10 Games People Play

BoththeCroftsandPricewaterhouseCoopersresearchwereconsistentinshowingtheemerginglinkbetweengamblingandcrime,andinparticulartherelationshipbetweengamblingandfraud21.

1.3 The Community Corrections Problem Gambling Prevalence Survey 2004

Followingthe2002surveyamongQueenslandcustodialoffenders,QueenslandTreasuryagreedtofundafurthersurveyamongthoseoffendersoncommunitycorrectionsorders.Communityordersincludethosewhoare on community service orders and those on post-prison community based release (parole). Offenders on theseordersliveinthegeneralcommunityandreportregularlytotheirlocalCommunityCorrectionsoffice.Therewere11,998suchoffendersintheCommunityCorrectionsystematthetimeofthesurvey.

21. Y.SakuraiandR.Smith,Gambling as a Motivation for the Commission of Financial Crime,(2003)AustralianInstituteofCriminology,4


2. Methodology

2.1 IntroductionThe2004CommunityCorrectionsGamblingPrevalenceSurveywasconductedbytheDepartmentofCorrectiveServicesutilisingfundingprovidedbytheQueenslandOfficeofGamingRegulation.DataprocessingwascarriedoutbytheOfficeofEconomicalandStatisticalResearch(OESR).

2.2 The Canadian Problem Gambling Index

Since the Queensland Household Gambling Survey 200122 the Queensland Government has utilised the Canadian Problem Gambling Index (CPGI) to provide consistency across its research efforts. The CPGI isfavouredoverotherscreeninginstrumentssuchastheSouthOaksGamblingScreen(SOGS)andtheDiagnosticandStatisticalManual(DSM-IV)becauseitincludesculturalandenvironmentalfactorsaswellasthepsychologicalframeworksutilisedintheabovetools.

Thesurveyinstrument(see2.3)includedaseriesofnineCPGIquestionswhicharescoredtogrouprespondentsintooneoffivegamblingcategories(seeTable2). 2�

Table 2 CPGI gambling groups

Non-gambling: No score on the CPGI. This group has not gambled in the 12 months prior to the survey.

Recreational (non problem) gambling: CPGI score of zero.Mosthaveresponded“never”tothemajorityoftheproblemgamblingbehaviouralindicators.Itispossiblethatarespondentcouldbeafrequentplayerwhogamblesheavilybuthasnotexperiencedanyadverseconsequencesofgambling.

Low risk gambling:CPGIscoreof1–2.Theserespondentswillhaveoneormoreresponsesof“sometimes”or“moreoften”toindicatorsofproblemgamblingbehaviourproblemsbutarenotlikelytohaveexperiencedanyadverseconsequencesofgambling.Theymaybeatriskiftheyareheavilyinvolvedingamblingandrespondtoatleasttwocorrelatesofproblemgambling.

Moderate risk gambling:CPGIscoreof3–7.Theserespondentswillhaveoneormore“mostofthetime”or“always”responsestoindicatorsofbehaviourproblemsandmayormaynothaveexperiencedadverseconsequencesofgambling.Theymaybeatriskiftheyareheavilyinvolvedingamblingandrespondtoatleast three or four correlates of problem gambling.

Problem gambling:CPGIscoreof8ormore.Thisgroupwillhaveexperiencedadverseconsequencesofgambling and may have lost control of their behaviour. Their involvement in gambling activity can be at any levelbutislikelytobeheavy.

2.3 Survey instrument

A30questionsurveyquestionnaire(AppendixB)wasdevelopedtodeterminethelevelofgamblingactivityamongoffendersoncommunitycorrectionsorders.Thesurveyaskedarangeofquestionsinrelationto:

• generaldemographics Questions1–7

• incomeandeducation Questions20–22

• gamblingactivity Questions8–9

• CPGIquestions Question10

• gamblingperceptions Questions11,17

• household/environmentalfactors Questions12,18–19

• ageofonset Question13

• help-seekingbehaviour Questions14–16,30

• comorbidities(depression,substanceuse) Questions23–25

• criminogeniclinks Questions26–29

22 Above,n1 2� JackieFerrisandHaroldWynne,The Canadian Problem Gambling Index Draft User Manual (2001),CanadianCentreonSubstanceAbuse, 2.�


ApartfromtheCPGIcomponent,questionswerechosentoenableabroadprofileofthoseineachgamblinggrouptobedeveloped.Issuessuchasfamilyenvironment,ageofonset,gamblingbehaviour,mentalhealth,substanceuseandhelp-seekingactivityallcontributetoanunderstandingofeachgamblingtypeandprovideclues to predicting susceptibility to developing problem gambling behaviours. Questions in relation to criminal behaviourwereusedtoanalyseanylinksbetweenproblemgamblingandcrime.

AdraftquestionnairewassubmittedtotheDepartmentofCorrectiveServicesAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderUnit,theWomen’sUnitandtotheDirectorofCommunityCorrectionstoensurethequestionswereappropriate,nonoffensiveandunderstandabletoallparticipants.AcopywasalsoprovidedtotheQueenslandOfficeofEconomicandStatisticalResearch(OESR)forfeedbackfromthatoffice.AdvicewasalsosoughtfromOESRastoanappropriatesamplesizetoensurethesampleadequatelyrepresentedeachstrata(see3.1).

2.4 Participants and participation rates

FourresearcherswererecruitedfromwithintheDepartmentofCorrectiveServices.Onewasappointedtoeachregion.ThesurveywasconductedthroughoutOctober/November2004witheachresearcherspendingupto5daysineachdesignatedoffice.FollowingthedepartureoftheresearcherstheofficescontinuedtoofferquestionnairestooffendersfortheremainderofthemonthofNovember.

Mostoffendersattendingtheofficesduringthesurveyperiodwereofferedaquestionnairetocomplete.Veryfewrefusedtoparticipateandthereforetheresponseratewashigh.Totalrefusalsaccordingtoregionwere:

• Metropolitan: 0

• Southern: 0

• Central:6

• Northern: 6

Total 12

Themajorityofrespondentsself-completedtheformthoughsomewereassistedbytheresearcherinaninterviewsetting.

Inall,580questionnaireswerereturned.Tenofthesewerediscardedasincompleteorotherwiseunusable,leaving570questionnairesfordataanalysis.

ThetotalCommunityCorrectionspopulation,fromwhichthissamplewasdrawnwas11,998atthetimeofthesurvey.Thisfigureexcludedthoseonfineoptions.

Indeterminingwhichofficestoincludeinthesurvey,carewastakentoensurethesurveycapturedarepresentativesampleacrossallfourCommunityCorrectionsregionsandthatthesampleadequatelyaccounted for the mixture of male/female and Indigenous/non-Indigenous representatives in the Community Corrections system.

Table3showstheofficessurveyedaccordingtoregion.Thenumberofofficessurveyedineachregionwasdeterminedonnumberofoffendersmanagedbyeachoffice.

Table 3 Community Corrections offices surveyed

Region AreaOfficessurveyed Officesnotsurveyed

Northern(RegionalOffice:Townsville) CairnsMareebaTownsvilleThuringowa

InnisfailPalm IslandMt Isa

Central(RegionalOffice:Rockhampton) MackayRockhamptonBundabergMaroochydore

GladstoneEmeraldNoosaGympieHerveyBay

Metropilitan(RegionalOffice:BrisbaneCity) CabooltureBrisbane South (Buranda)

RedcliffePine RiversWynnumClevelandInalaBrisbane North (Chermside)BrisbaneWest(Toowong)

Southern(RegionalOffice:MtGravatt) SouthportIpswich

BurleighHeadsRomaLoganBeenleighKingaroy

1�Problem gambling among offenders in Queensland Community Corrections

Aswellasvisitingtheaboveareaoffices,severaldistrictofficeswithintheareaofficejurisdictionwerevisited.Inparticular,thisincludedAurukun,PormpuraawandYarrabahIndigenouscommunities,aswellasMossmanand Atherton.

2.5 Statisticalsignificance

Unlessotherwiseindicatedallreferencestostatisticalsignificancearep<.05.

2.6 Creation of variables

Variableswerecreatedbasedonresponsestootherquestions.Thesewere:

• CPGI: TheCanadianProblemGamblingIndexresultswerebasedontheresponsestoQuestions10ofthe survey (see Appendix B).

• Gamblertype.SeeTable2.

• Criminogenicflag:Aflagtoindicatewhethertherespondenthasevercommittedagambling-relatedcrime,basedonacombinationofquestions26to29(seeAppendixB).

2.7 Region coding

Regioncodeisusedinweighting,andwasbasedonpostcode.Theavailabledatatoassignregionweretheareaofficejurisdictionslist(whichlistedthesuburblocationsofallDCSofficeslocatedwithinaregion),andalistofpostcodeswithlocalitynamesfromAustraliaPost.Thestepstakentoassignsurveyrecordstoregionswere:

• thesamplepostcodewasmergedwiththeAustraliaPostlisttofindthelocalitynamesforeachpostcode in the sample

• thesamplewasmergedwiththejurisdictionslistbysuburbnametolookeduptheofficenameandregion for all the locality names in the sample

• recordswhichdidnotmatchwithanofficeandregioninthiswayweremanuallycheckedandassignedtoanoffice(atotaloffourpostcodeswereassignedinthisway)

• forthosepeoplewithnopostcode,theS1regioncodewasusedtoassignaregion

• anyunknownregionswereassignedtoMetropolitanregion(themostcommon)

2.8 Weighting

Useofweightingvariablesisastandardstatisticaltechniquewhichallowspopulationestimatestobedrawnfrom a sample.

Thesampledatawasweightedasfollows:

Thesampleof570respondentswasweightedtopopulationcountsofDCSclients.AtthetimeofthesurveythenumberofCommunityCorrectionsoffenderseligibletoparticipatewas11,998people.

PopulationcountsofeligibleoffenderswereprovidedbyRegion,IndigenousStatusandgender.ThepopulationsprovidedincludedasmallnumberwhoseIndigenousstatuswasunknown.ThesecountswereassignedanIndigenousstatusbasedontheproportionofpeopleinthesamegenderandregionwithknownIndigenousstatus.

RecordsareweightedaccordingtotheRegion/Indigenous/Genderstratumwhichtheyfallinto.Weightingisasimplenumber-raisedmethod,inwhichthesampleinagivenweightingstratumisweightedtothepopulationcountforthatstratum,withallsampleunitsinthestratumreceivingthesameweight.

Onestratumhadasamplecountofone–IndigenousfemalesinMetropolitanregion.Forthepurposesofweighting,MetropolitanfemaleswerecollapsedwithfemalesinSouthernRegion.

Tableswereproducedforeachquestioninthesurveyseparately.Somesurveyrespondentsdidnotanswerallthequestions.Weightswerecalculatedquestionbyquestion–thatis,onlythoserespondentswhogiveananswertoaparticularquestionwereincludedinthetableforthatquestion.

2.9 General information on output tables

Tablescontainingpopulationestimatesofnumberandpercentageaccompaniedby95percentconfidenceintervals have been supplied.


Level of disaggregation

Eachquestioninthesurveywascrosstabulatedagainstthefollowingmarginalvariables:

• gender

• 10yearagegroup(under25,25–34,35-44,45-54,55+)

• Indigenousstatus

• gamblingtype

• criminogenicflag

• reportingregion


3. Queensland Community Corrections problem gambling prevalence survey 2004 – results

3.1 Representative validity of the sample

Otherthanregionalconsiderations,thefourstratameasuredwere:

• male

• female

• Indigenous

• non-Indigenous

IneachstratathesampleprovidedanadequaterepresentationofthetotalCommunityCorrectionspopulationas seen in Table 4

Table 4 Sample representation

Strata Survey sample Total Community Corrections population

Male 78.88% 78.6�%

Female 21.12% 21.�7%

Total Indigenous 17.78% 16.91%

Total non-Indigenous 82.22% 8�.09%

Indigenous male 14.4% 12.97%

Indigenous female 4.8% �.94%

3.2 Prevalence and the gambling types

Table 5belowoutlinestheprevalenceoftheCPGIgamblingtypesbasedonthe570interviewsinthesample.Comparisonsarethenmadewiththeprisonpopulationandthegeneralpopulation.

Table 5 CPGI gambling types: community, prison and general population comparisons

CPGI CategoryCommunity Corrections

prevalence (%)

Number in category

Estimated number of

offenders in Community Corrections

Prison population

comparisons* (%)

General Queensland population

(%)**

Non-gambling 15.1 86 1816 8.4 19.7

Recreational (non-problem)

51.0 291 6126 48.� 72.4

Lowrisk 12.2 69 1458 1�.5 5.�

Moderaterisk 12.� 70 1475 12.4 2.0

Problem gambling 9.4 54 112� 17.4 0.5

TOTAL 100% 570 11998 100% 100%

*Figurestakenfromthe Department of Corrective Services Prison Survey 2002whichmeasuredtheprevalenceofproblemgamblingamong the prison population.

**Figuresbasedon2004QueenslandgeneralpopulationprevalencesurveyprovidedbytheQueenslandOfficeofGamingRegulation.

Non gambler group: 15.1 per cent of those surveyed did not gamble at all. This compares to 8.4 per cent of the prisonpopulationand19.7percentofthegeneralpopulationwhoarenongamblers.

Recreational gambler group: Recreational gamblers comprise the largest group in this survey at 51.0 per cent of respondents. This is a similar result to the prison population at 48.� per cent but is less than the generalpopulationat72.4percent.Gamblersinthisgroupdonotgenerallyplayheavilyandarenotlikelytoexperienceanyadverseeffectsoftheirgambling.Basedonthesefigures,itappearsthatcustodialandcommunitycorrectionsoffendersaremuchlesslikelytoberecreationalgamblersthanthegeneralpopulation.


Low risk gambler group: Lowriskgamblersmakeup12.2percentofthesamplegroupwhichrepresentsapproximately1,460peoplecurrentlyoncommunitycorrectionorders.Thispercentageissimilartotheprisonpopulationestimateat13.5percentandovertwicethatofthegeneralpopulationat5.3percent.

Likerecreationalgamblers,thelow-riskgroupdonotappeartogambleheavilyandrarelyexperienceanyadverseeffectsfromgambling.TheCPGIidentifiesthoseinthelowriskgroupasbeingatriskiftheyrespondpositivelytotwoormoreofthecorrelatesofproblemgamblingandareheavilyinvolvedingambling.

Moderate risk gambler group: Moderateriskgamblersmakeup12.3percentofrespondentswhichtranslatestoapproximately1,475peoplecurrentlyoncommunitycorrectionorders.Thispercentageisalmostidenticaltothatoftheprisonpopulation(12.4%)andoversixtimesthatofthegeneralpopulationattwopercent.

Moderateriskgamblersaremorelikelytohaveexperiencedsomeproblemswithgamblingbehaviourthanlowriskorrecreationalgamblers.Theyarealsolikelytogamblemorefrequentlyandutilisemoregamblingproductsthanthetwopreviousgroups.Inthissensemoderateriskgamblersareeffectively‘atrisk’ofbecoming problem gamblers and are potentially in need of intervention to prevent this happening and to address any adverse behaviours they may already be experiencing.

Problem gambler group: Problemgamblersmakeup9.4percentofrespondentswhichrepresentsover1,120peoplecurrentlyoncommunitycorrectionorders.Whileinpercentagetermsthisfigureisapproximatelyhalfthatoftheprevalenceintheprisonpopulation(17.4%),itnonethelesstranslatestoaround17timesthatofthegeneral population at 0.55 per cent.

Problemgamblersarethosewhohaveexperiencedadverseconsequencesfromtheirgamblingandarelikelyto have lost control of their behaviour in this regard. This group participates in a greater number of gambling activitiesthananyothergroup,tendstoplaymorefrequentlyandwithgreateramountsofmoneyand,importantlyforCorrectiveServices,arebyfarthemostlikelygrouptohavecommittedagambling-relatedoffence (41%) 24.

Takentogether,theproblemgamblingandmoderateriskgroupsrepresent21.6percentornearly2600peoplein the current community corrections population. A further 150 offenders scored as non gamblers on the CPGI yetstillhavecommittedagambling-relatedoffence.Liketheproblemgamblerandmoderateriskgroups,manyinthisgroupmaybeinneedofinterventionorassistancetodealwithgambling-relatedproblems.Thiswillparticularly be the case if gambling abstinence has been less than voluntary such as due to imprisonment.

3.3 Socio-demographic comparisons

Age

According to the Queensland Household Gambling Survey 2001 55 per cent of the problem gambling group are agedbetween18and34years.Thisissignificantlyhigherthantheestimatednumberinthegeneralpopulation(�6%) 25. In a study of offenders in the Australian Capital Territory 85.7 per cent of the problem gambling group werealsointhisagegroup 26.

Inthepresentstudy,while72.5percentoftheproblemgamblinggroupareaged18to34,thisagegroupcomprises76.5percentofthetotalCommunityCorrectionspopulation.Incontrast,the35to44yearoldgroup,whocomprise15.8percentofthecommunitycorrectionspopulation,areover-representedintheproblemgamblingandmoderateriskgamblinggroups,at24.5percentand20percentrespectively.

Gender

Overall,thesamplegroupcomprised78.9percentmaleand21.1percentfemale.Thiscomparesto78.6per cent and 21.4 per cent respectively for the total Community Corrections offender population. The sample thereforeadequatelyreflectedthegeneralCommunityCorrectionspopulation.

TherearenostatisticallysignificantgenderdifferencesacrosstheCPGIcategoriesoringamblingpatternsofbehaviour.Therewerealsonomeasurabledifferencesingambling-relatedcriminalactivitybetweenthegenders.

24 Thisfigureisbasedonresponsestosurveyquestions26to29whichrelatedtoallgambling-relatedoffencesandcouldinclude offencesforwhichnochargeswerelaid. 25 Above,n1,13 26 J.LahnandP.Grabosky,Gambling and Clients of ACT Corrections Final Report (2003)CentreforGamblingResearch,Regulatory InstitutionsNetwork,AustralianNationalUniversity,51


Intermsofcomorbiditiesslightlymorewomen(63%)thanmen(52%)statedthattheyhaveexperienceddepressioninthelast12months.Significantlymoremales(50%)thanfemales(34%)haveusedalcoholordrugswhilegamblingbutlesswomen(28%)thanmen(36%)felttheygambledmoreundertheinfluenceofalcohol or drugs.

Slightlymoremales(39%)thanfemales(33%)wouldbewillingtoattendafreegamblinghelpprogrambutlesswomen(23%)thanmen(33%)statedtheywouldnotbeinterestedinattendingsuchaprogram.

Family/upbringinginfluences

a) Adults in family gambled

Respondentsinthemoderateriskandproblemgamblergroupsweremorelikelytoindicatethattheygrewupinhouseholdswhereadultseitheralwaysoroftengambled.Thismayindicatethatthenormalisationofgamblingduringtheirupbringinghasaninfluenceinthedevelopmentofgamblingproblemsasadults.

Figure 2 Did adults in family gamble by gambling group

b) Agefirstgambled

Respondentsintheproblemgamblergrouparemostlikelytoindicatethattheirfirstgamblingexperienceoccurred prior to 18 years of age (44%).

Figure 3 Age of first gambling experience by gambling group

Marital/partner status

Forty-threepercentoftheproblemgamblergrouphavenopartner.Asthelowestpercentageofanyofthegroups,thiscontinuesadownwardtrendasseeninTable6.ThiscontrastswiththefindingsoftheQueensland Household Gambling Survey 2001 (QHGS) inwhichtheproblemgamblinggroupweretheleastlikelytobepartnered(42%)andtherecreationalgroupthemostlikely(68%)27.

27 Above,n1,13.Nofiguresweregivenonnongamblers.

Non gambler

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

No,Never Yes,Rarely, Sometimes

Yes,Always,Often

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

17 or younger 18 or over

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

70%

80%

51

4448

26

�6 �6

41

��7 �6

1� 1114

�4

27

2627

�1

44

72 7�69

56


Table 6 Unpartnered by gambling group

Gambler group % with no partner

Non gambler 59

Recreational gambler 54

Lowrisk 57

Moderaterisk 45

Problem gambler 4�

Sample average 5�

TheQHGSproposesthatthismaybeduetotherelativelyyoungageoftheproblemgamblinggroup28. While this may be so in the general population it does not explain the opposite phenomena in the Community Correctionspopulationwheretheunder34agegroupisunder-representedintheproblemgamblergroupandthe �5-44 age group overrepresented.29

Household issues

Theinvolvementofanoffender’spartneringamblingactivitydoesnotseemtohaveanybearingontheoffender’sgamblingtype(Table7).Whilethepartnersofnongamblersarelesslikelytogamblethanthepartnersofgamblers,thereisnosignificantdifferenceinthegamblingactivityofpartnersinthefourgamblinggroups.

Table 7 Gambling of partner by gambling group

Gambler group Partner has gambled (%)

Non gambler 9


Lowrisk 20

Moderaterisk �9

Problem gambler �2

Differencesareseenhoweverinthestressthatgamblingplacesontherelationshipbetweenthegamblerandtheirpartner.Table8outlinesthepercentageofrespondentswheregamblinghasNOTcausedargumentsbetweentheoffenderandtheirpartner/spouse.

Table 8 Gambling and household arguments by gambling group

Gambler group Gambling has NOT caused arguments (%)

Non gambler 90


Lowrisk 79

Moderaterisk 61

Problem gambler 28

Employment

Over �0 per cent of the total cohort are unemployed compared to 4.6 per cent in the general Queensland population�0.ThisreflectstheCommunityCorrectionspopulationasawhole.Fifty-onepercentofthesamplegroupareemployedeitherfull-time,part-timeorcasually.

Problemgamblersarethemostlikelygrouptobeunemployedoronapension.AsimilarstudyamongoffendersinACTcorrectionsalsofoundproblemgamblersareslightlymorelikelytobeunemployed�1. This contrastswiththefindingsoftheQueensland Household Gambling Survey 2001whichfoundthat:

Mostpeopleinthelowrisk,moderateriskandproblemgamblinggroupsareemployedfull-time,part-time,casuallyorself-employed.Althoughpeoplewhoareretired,whoarestudentsorwhohavefull-timehomedutiesmightberegardedashavingmoreavailabletimetogamble,theypresentashavingfewerproblemswithgamblingthanthoseintheworkforce.�2

28 Ibid.29 Seeabove,n1,15�0 AsatFebruary2005.QueenslandOfficeofEconomicandStatisticalResearchwebsitehttp://www.oesr.qld.gov.au�1 Above,n26,53�2 Above,n1,14


Problemgamblersaretheleastlikelytobeemployedeitherfull-time,part-timeorcasually(34.5%)whilerecreationalgamblersarethemostlikelytobeemployed(55.7%)followedbynongamblers(50.7%)andmoderateriskgamblers(50.4%).

Figure 4 Employment by gambling group

Income

IncomelevelsweregenerallyreflectiveoftheCommunityCorrectionspopulation.Interestinglyinviewoftheemploymentfiguresabove,theproblemgamblergrouphasaslightlylowerpercentageofrespondentsearningunder$10,000.Problemgamblersalsohavethehighestpercentageofthoseearningabove$40,000ofanyofthe gambling groups.

Figure 5 Income by gambling group

Education

Justunderhalf(47.2%)ofthetotalrespondentshavecompletedyear10astheirhighesteducationallevel.ThisisreflectiveoftheCommunityCorrectionspopulation.Whilethedifferencesacrossgamblingtypeswerenotsubstantial,thereweresomeapparenttrendsthatareworthyofcomment.Forexample,moderateandproblem gambler groups reported a higher than average per centage of respondents completing year 10. The datasuggestedthatthemoreseveretheproblemwithgambling,thelesslikelytherespondentistohavecompletedyear12.Interestinglyhowever,problemgamblerswerethemostlikelygrouptoreportcompletingapost-secondaryeducation(22%).ThisismostcommonlyaTAFE,ratherthanauniversity,qualification.Bywayofcomparison,theproportionofallAustralianswithadiploma,advancedcertificateorless(postsecondaryschool)is30.2percentwhiletheproportionwithaBachelordegreeorhigheris18.1percent.��

�� AustralianBureauofStatistics,“Proportionofallpersonsaged15-64withanon-schoolqualification”(2003),http://www.abs.gov.au

Non gambler

Moderate risk

Problem gambling

Recreational gambling

Full-time

Part-time casual

Unemployed

CDEP

Pension/retired

30%

25%

20%15%

10%

5%

0%

35%

40%

45%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Low risk

Under$10,000

$10,000-$40,000

$40,000+

Non gambler

Moderate risk

Problem gambling

Recreational gambling

Low risk

28

25

�8

4

12

�6

20

26

1

19

�0

17

�0

4

19 20

�0��

6

20

24

10

44

2

28

�6

42

22

�1

5�

11

�4

5�

9

�4

52

8

29

49

14


Figure 6 Education level by gambling group

3.4 Gambling and behavioural issues

Gambling perceptions

Itappearsthatthemoreseverethegamblingproblem,thegreaterthetendencytowardsfaultycognitionsregardingthelikelihoodofgamblingwins.Thismaysupporttheviewthatcognitivedeficienciesplayaroleinthe development of some gambling problems�4.InbothexamplesshowninFigure7,problemgamblersare,statisticallyspeaking,significantlymorelikelytoagreethanthesampleaverage.

Figure 7 Perceptions of increased likelihood of gambling winnings

Games played

Electronicgamingmachines(EGMs)arebyfarthemostpopulargamblingactivityacrossallgroups.InstantScratch-ItsandLottoproductsaresimilarlypopularacrossmostgamblinggroups.KenoismostpopularamongthemoderateandproblemgamblinggroupsandcardplayingissignificantlymorepopularamongproblemgamblersandespeciallyIndigenousplayers.Figure8showsallgamblingactivitiesplayedbyrespondentsinthe12monthspriortothesurvey.Figure9thencomparesthiswiththegamenominatedbyrespondentsastheone played most often in the last 12 months.

Figure 8 All gambling activities by gambling group

�4 Aboven1,20

Year 10 or less

UptoYear12

Post Secondary/TAFE

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

Agree that after losing many times you are more likely to win

AgreethatifanEGMhasn’tpaidout in a while it is due to pay

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

EGM* Scratchits Keno Horses,Dogs

Lotto etc

Table Games

Cards Sports betting

Dice Bingo Internet

*Electronicgamingmachines(Pokies)

60%

50%

40%

30%20%

10%

0%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Non gambler

Recreational Low risk

Moderate riskProblem

11

2015

44

2�

�5 �5

58

45

�7

18

46

�2

19

58

��

9

62

29

7

56

22 22

68

89

84

94

6�

44

6� 6�

28 29

55 56

2428

40

�1

48

25

6�

5�

6

2�18

24

5 �

1�

59 11

4 26

� 4 6 5

11

51 2 0

4�


Figure9clearlyshowsthedominantpositionofEGMsonthegamblingactivityoftherespondentgroup.Thisisparticularlysoamongmoderateandproblemgamblerswhere70percentand84percentrespectivelynominatedthepokiesastheirmostplayedgamblingactivity.

Figure 9 Game played most often by gambling group

Frequency and duration

Figures10and11showthefrequencyanddurationofplayrespectively.Recreationalandlowriskgamblersareprominentamongthosewhogambleonceaweekorlessandwhospendlessthanonehouroneachgamblingsession.Moderateriskandproblemgamblerspredominateamongthosewhogambletwiceormoreeachweekandwhospendanythingoveronehourineachgamblingsession.Asignificantlygreaterproportionofmoderateriskgamblersplayfor1-2hourspersession(45.4%comparedtotheaverageforthesampleof18.3%)whiletheproportionofproblemgamblerswassignificantlyhigherthananyothergroupamongthosewhoplayedforanythingover3hourspersession.

Figure 10 Frequency of play by gambling group

Figure 11 Hours per gambling session by gambling group

*Electronicgamingmachines(Pokies)

< 1 per week

1 per week

2-3 per week

4-5 per week

> 5 per week

< 1 hour 1-2 hours 3-4 hours > 4 hours

60%50%40%30%20%10% 0%

70%80%90%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

70%

EGM* Scratchits Keno Horses,Dogs

Lotto etc

Table Games

Cards Sports betting

Dice

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

70

84

20

85 4 5 5 4

27 5 6

2

26

5� 2 2

5 5

01 2

4 41 2

0 0 02 1

0

67

52

45

24

59

�428

10 811

2024

0 0

7.5

16

0.6 0 0.5�

66.5

59.2

27.�

1�.5 1�.4

19.8

45.4

�7.8

�.2

9.9

19.�

�2.�

0 1.94.7

16.5

66

�6


Gambling expenditure

Only19percentofthemoderategamblergroupspendlessthan$20pergamblingsession.Thisissignificantlylessthantheaverageforthetotalsample(48%).Unsurprisinglytherefore,58percentofthisgroupspend$40ormorepergamblingsessionwith27percentspendingupwardsof$60persession.

Seventy-eightpercentoftheproblemgamblinggroupspendmorethan$40pergamblingsessionwith61percentspending$60ormorepersession.Whenweconsiderthat41percentofproblemgamblersplaytwotofivetimesperweek,theaccumulativeimpactoftheirgamblingexpenditurebecomesclear.

Figure 12 Expenditure per session by gambling group

Thesurveyobtainedinformationonwhetherrespondentsgambledforanythingotherthanmoney.Table9detailstheresponsestothisquestion:

Table 9 Non cash gambling stakes

Item No of respondents

Cigarettes 10

Alcohol 7

Favours(unspecified) 5

Drugs 2

Artwork 1

Lollies/Chocolate 2

Other �

While“favours”remainedunspecifiedanecdotalevidenceprovidedtotheresearcherssuggestedthatsomefavours may be sexual.

Help-seeking behaviour

a) Self exclusions: The Gambling Legislation Amendment Act 2004 introduced a range of amendments across the gaming statutes of Queensland. While self-exclusion provisions have been a part of the voluntary Problem Gambling Code of Practice since its inception in 2002�5,theActrepresentedthefirsttimethatself-exclusionwasspecificallydealtwithinlegislation.

In introducing the Bill to Parliament the Treasurer noted in his second reading speech:

Thebill’simplementationofalegislativemodelforanewexclusionsregimeforpeopleexperiencingproblemscontrollingtheirgamblingbehaviourisofparticularsignificance…Itincludesenhancementsto the current procedures for self-exclusions to standardise the self exclusion provisions and create a dutyforgamblingproviderstoexcludethecustomeratthecustomer’srequest�6.

�5 QueenslandResponsibleGamblingCodeofPractice:TrialandReview(2002)QueenslandTreasury,section3�6 GamblingLegislationAmendmentBill2004,secondreadingspeech,18May2004.

< $20 $20-$39 $40-$59 $60 or more

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%10%

0%

70%80%

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

76.9

48.7

18.9

6.8

1�.�

�0

21.1

1�.9

5.8 5.6

�1.5

16.7

1.4

15.2

26.7

60.7

2�Problem gambling among offenders in Queensland Community Corrections

�7 See the Gambling Legislation Amendment Act 2004�8 Above,n1,23�9 M.Rockloff,andG.Schofield,“FactorAnalysisofBarrierstoTreatmentforProblemGambling” Journal of Gambling Studies (2004) 20 (2),12240 D.Hodgins,etal,“PathwaystoRecoveryfromGamblingProblems:Follow-UpfromaGeneralPopulationSurvey”Journal of Gambling Studies(1999)15(2),9341 M.AlbaneseandH.Shaffer,“TreatmentConsiderationsinPatientswithAddictions”Primary Psychiatry2003,10(9),5542 ReportedinGCooper,“ExploringandUnderstandingOnlineAssistanceforProblemGamblers:ThePathwaysModel” International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction,(2003)1(2)http:www.pasinfo.net/journal/v1i2/v1i2a04article.html

Thesurveysoughttodeterminewhatpercentageofrespondentshadaccessedtheselfexclusionprocesses.Suchsmallnumbersofrespondentshaveselfexcludedthatthesefigureswerestatisticallyunreliable.Table10thereforedetailsthepercentageofrespondentswhohavenot self excluded from gambling venues. Whileinrealtermsthenumberofrespondentswhoselfexcludeislow,thetrendispredictablewithproblemgamblersbeingtheleastlikelytohave never excluded(74.3%)orthemostlikelytohaveselfexcluded.Thereasonsforthelowtakeupratemayincludealackofunderstandingofthesystemandthefactthatcurrentlyexclusions operate on a venue by venue basis. This means that even if a gambler excludes him/herself from one venue they can still access gambling at another. Numbers accessing the self-exclusion process has been disappointing(seeTable11).Inrecognitionofthis,theGovernmenthasintroducedanewself-exclusionprocesstobeginonMay1,2005�7.

Table 10 Self exclusion from gaming venue by gambling type

Gambling type Never self-excluded from gaming venue (%)

Non gambler 94


Lowrisk 94

Moderaterisk 90

Problem gamber 74

b) Help-seeking

Aswithselfexclusionabove,thenumberswhohavesoughtgambling-relatedhelparegenerallysolowastobestatisticallyunreliable.Table11thereforeshowsthenumberswhohave not accessedhelpwithgamblingproblems in the last 12 months.

Table 11 Per centage who have not sought help with gambling in past 12 months

Gambling type Never sought help with gambling (%)

Non gambler 94


Lowrisk 99

Moderaterisk 9�

Problem gamber 86

Ofrespondentsintheproblemgamblergroup,11.6percenthavesoughtandreceivedgambling-relatedhelpinthepast12months.Theremainder(2.4%)eitherdidnotrespondtothequestionorsoughthelpanddidnotreceiveit.ThisfigureisconsistentwiththefindingsoftheQHGSwhichindicatedthat57percentofproblemgamblersdonotwanthelpandthat19percentofthisgroupactuallyseekhelp(howeverdefined)withtheirgambling problems�8.

WhiletheQHGSquotesafigureof57percentwhodonotwanthelp,otherstudieshaveplacedthisfigureashigh as 82 per cent�9. This phenomenon is not exclusive to Queensland. A recent Canadian study revealed that 5outof6adultswithgamblingproblemswerelikelytorecoverwithouttreatment40whileBostonresearchersAlbaneseandShafferacknowledgethatrecoveryfromaddictionsgenerallyismorecommonwithouttreatmentthan previously thought41. Another study pessimistically reported that only � per cent of American problem gamblersseekprofessionalhelpinanygivenyear42.


Basedonthesefindingsaresultofover11percentofproblemgamblersseekinghelpisanencouragingoneandmayindicateawillingnessonthepartofmanyCommunityCorrectionsoffenderstorespondpositivelytoany assistance provided by Corrective Services to overcome their gambling problems.

c) Help source

Thesurveyaskedatheoreticalquestionregardingwhererespondentsfelttheymightseekgambling-relatedassistanceifevertheyneededit(Figure13).FamilyandfriendswereunsurprisinglythemostfavouredsourcesofhelpfollowedbytheGovernmentfundedGamblingHelpservices(includingtheGamblingHelpLineandface-to-faceGamblingHelpcounsellingservices).TherelativelyhighrecognitionofGamblingHelpandthefactthattheyarefullyfundedbytheQueenslandGovernmentmakesthemtheobviouschoicetoprovidegamblingassistancetooffenderswithintheCustodialandCommunityCorrectionsystems.

Of particular encouragement is the fact that so many respondents nominated their Community Correction casemanagerastheonetheywouldmostlikelygotoforhelp.CasemanagerscameinbehindtheGamblingHelpservicesandjustaheadofotherlocalcounsellingservicesinthechoiceofrespondents.Thisbeingso,there is a need for some level of training/orientation to be provided to case managers on the issues involved in assessing and providing assistance to those experiencing gambling problems. This is particularly the case whentheproblemgamblingislinkedtocriminalbehaviourorispotentiallyso.

Inlinewiththefindingsofresearchoutlinedabove,theproblemgamblinggrouparetheleastlikelytoseekhelpfromthemajorityofsourcesandthemostlikelygrouptostatethey“don’tknow”wheretoseekhelp.Partofthereasonforthereluctanceofproblemgamblerstoseekhelpistheincreasinglywelldocumentedpreferenceofthisgrouptohandletheproblem“ontheirown.”Researchfoundthat82percentofbothresolvedandactiveproblemgamblershadadesireto“handletheproblemontheirown.”4� According to theworkofNathanthistendencytoself-recoveryissomethingproblemgamblersshareincommonwithalcoholics.44

Inviewofthesefindings,theprovisionofself-helpmaterialsaswellasresourcesforfamilymembersmaybeofassistance.

Figure 13 Help sources by gambling group

4� SeeRockloffandSchofield,aboven39,12244 P.Nathan,“TheRoleofNaturalRecoveryinAlcoholismandPathologicalGambling”,(2003)Journal of Gambling Studies19(3),284

d) Free gambling help program

Whenaskediftheywouldaccessafreegamblinghelpprogramshouldtheyeverrequireit,theresultsareevenlyspreadbetweenyesandnoresponsesacrossallfourgroups.Whileproblemgamblersaremarginallytheleastlikelytoaccesssuchaservice,theyarealsotheleastlikelytorefuse(Figure14).Basedontheseresults,onethirdofproblemgamblers(33%)andslightlymorethanthisnumberofmoderateriskgamblers(36%)wouldbeinterestedinparticipatinginafreegamblinghelpprogramme.Twenty-sixpercentofproblemgamblersand36percentofmoderateriskgamblersarenotinterestedinparticipatinginsuchaprogram.Interestingly,41.5percentofproblemgamblerseitherdidnotknowordidnotspecifywhethertheywouldbeinterested in such a program.

Family

Friends

Community m

ember

Doctor/P

sych

Clergy

Community Corre

ctions

Counselling Servi

ces

Gambling help

Don’tknow

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

70%

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

6�

46 47

�9

4�

�5

44

�4

11 10

7 7

18

22

8

18

811

2

10

26

222�

15

2� 2�21

15

�5�8 �7

27

42

6

12


Yes No

Community Corrections General population**QHGS,23

Alcohol/drug use while gambling

More likely to gamble with alcohol/drugs

60%50%40%30%20%10% 0%

70%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

80%

30%

25%

20%15%10%

5% 0%

40%35% Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

Non gambler

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

Figure 14 Willingness to access free gambling help program by gambling type

Depression,alcoholanddruguse

a) Gambling and depression

The self perception of depression is much more prevalent in the Community Corrections sample population than that reported in the general population by the Queensland Household Gambling Survey 2001 (Figure 15).

AmongtheCommunityCorrectionsrespondents,moreoftheproblemgamblinggroup(80%)reportedfeelingdepressedinthepast12monthsthananyothergroup.Sixty-eightpercentofmoderateriskgamblersreportedsimilarly.Inthegeneralpopulationtheselfperceptionofdepressionamongproblemgamblers(51%)wassignificantlyhigherthaninmoderateriskgamblers(21%).

Figure 15 Self perception of depression in Community Corrections and the general population by gambling type

�7 �9 �6

��

�9 �8 �6

26

4451

49

68

80

1� 11

21 21

51

40.2

7076

8�

24.4

�8

72 72

b)Gambling,alcoholandotherdruguse

Malerespondentsaresignificantlymorelikelytohaveusedalcoholand/orotherdrugswhilegamblingthanfemales (50.5% to ��.7% respectively).

Problemandmoderateriskgamblersaresignificantlymorelikelythanthesampleaveragetohaveusedalcoholordrugswhilegambling(83%and76%comparedto47%respectively).Similarly,problemandmoderateriskgamblersaresignificantlymorelikelytoreportincreasedgamblingactivitythanthesampleaverage,whileundertheinfluenceofalcoholordrugs(72%and72%comparedto34%respectively).

Figure 16 Alcohol and drug use and influence on gambling activity by gambling type


Gambling and crime

Thesurveyaskedasuiteofquestionstodeterminewhetherrespondentshadcommittedgambling-relatedoffences.Overall,problemgamblersaresignificantlymorelikelytohavecommittedagambling-relatedcrimeatsometimeinthepast(40.7%comparedtothesampleaverageof10.6%)whilerecreationalgamblersaresignificantlylesslikelytohavecommittedsuchanoffence(4%).Generallyspeaking,thefurtheralongthecontinuumtowardsproblemgamblingthegreaterthelikelihoodofagambling-relatedcriminalhistory(seeFigure 17). The one exception to this trend concerns the non gambler.

Whilerespondentsinthenon-gamblergrouphavenotgambledinthe12monthspriortothesurvey,asmallbut notable number of these offenders have committed a gambling-related offence.

Around 8.2percentofthosesurveyed,representingnearly150offenderscurrentlyintheCommunityCorrections system appear to be non gamblers and yet have committed a gambling-related offence in the past.

Thereisthereforesomepotentialforthoseinthiscategorytohaveexperiencedgamblingproblemsinthepast,butforavarietyofreasons,includingimprisonment,self-correctionorprofessionalassistance,haveceasedtogamble in the past year.

Asimilargamblingprevalence/gambling-relatedcrimecontinuumdescribedaboveisalsoapparentwhenweexaminethoseoffenderswhosecurrentoffenceisgambling-related.Onceagain,problemgamblersaresignificantlymorelikelytohavecommittedacurrentgambling-relatedoffencethanthesampleaverage(18.2%compared to 4.7% respectively).

Whilethetrendsinrelationtogamblingprevalenceandcrimeareconsistentinbothanalyses,itisimportanttonotethattheincidenceofgambling-relatedcrimeislesswhenwelookatonlycurrentoffences.Thismeansthatanoffender’sproblemswithgamblingmaybeoverlookedifassessmenttoolsfocusonlyoncurrentoffences or on recent history.

Gambling-related offence anytime

Gambling-related offence current

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Non gambler

Recreational

Lowrisk

Moderaterisk

Problem gambler

8.24.2

11

17.2

41

5.22 �

7

18

Figure 17 Gambling-related offences ‘anytime’ and ‘current’ by gambling type.


45 SeebelowunderRemoteIndigenousCommunities

IndigenousAll played

Non-IndigenousAll played

IndigenousMost played

Non-IndigenousMost played

60%50%40%30%20%10% 0%

70%EGM

Instant Scratchits

Keno

Horses,Dogs

Gold Lotto

Table games

Cards

Sports betting

Dice

Bingo

Internet

4. Indigenous and regional issues

4.1 Indigenous variants

Overall

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders comprised 19.2 per cent of those surveyed compared to 16.1 per cent of the total Community Corrections population.

Prevalence

Slightly more Indigenous than non-Indigenous respondents are non gamblers (18% and 14% respectively) but ahigherpercentageofIndigenousrespondentsaremoderaterisk(17%)andproblemgamblers(14%)thannon-Indigenousrespondents(11%and8%respectively).Interestingly,Indigenousrespondentsarelesslikelyto be recreational gamblers (�9%) than non-Indigenous respondents (54%). See Table 12.

Table 12 Indigenous, non-Indigenous gambling prevalence comparison by gambling type

Gambling type Indigenous Non-Indigenous

Non gambler 18.4 14.4

Recreational gambler �8.7 5�.7

Lowrisk 12.2 12.2

Moderaterisk 17.0 11.�

Problem gambler 1�.7 8.4

Gambling behaviour

Indigenousrespondentsarelesslikelytohaveplayedelectronicgamingmachines(51%),GoldLotto(28%)orKeno(19%)inthelast12monthsthannon-Indigenousrespondents(67%,43%and32%respectively)butsignificantlymorelikely(19%)tohaveplayedcardsformoneythannon-Indigenousrespondents(8%).Theyarealsosignificantlymorelikelytoplaycardsastheirmostdominantgamblingactivity(8%)thantheirnon-Indigenouscounterparts(lessthan1%).Similarly,Indigenousrespondentsaresignificantlymorelikelytohaveplayedcardsastheirfirstevergamblingactivity(14%)comparedtonon-Indigenousrespondents(5%).Thesefiguresmayreflecttheinfluenceofso-called“cardschools”or“cardpits”inIndigenouscommunities.45

Figure18compares“allgamesplayed”byIndigenousandnon-Indigenousrespondentsinthelast12monthswithwhichgamerespondentsnominatedastheonetheyplayedmost.InbothcasescardplayingistheonlystatisticallysignificantdifferenceingamblingactivitybetweenIndigenousandnon-Indigenousgamblers.

Figure 18 Gambling activity by Indigenous status

51

40

19

14

28

19

9

4 4 6

1

67

54

�2

25

4�

1085

25

1

�7

12

42

11

58

20 0 0

44

0 0

12

46

15

1 0.�

6

0.�

5 5


46 Atotalof24responseswerereceivedfromtheIndigenouspopulationinthesecommunitiesoutofatotalCommunityCorrectionspopulation of �8�.

Thirty-onepercentofIndigenousrespondentsreportedthattheycommencedgamblingbetweentheagesof10and17comparedto23percentofnon-Indigenousrespondentswhocommencedgamblingatthisage.ThisplacestheIndigenoussampleinasimilarcategorytothemoderateriskgroup,30percentofwhombegangamblingbetweentheagesof10to17.

Help seeking

TwelvepercentofIndigenousrespondentsindicatedtheyhadsoughttoexcludethemselvesfromgamblingvenuescomparedto3percentofnon-Indigenousrespondents.ThisreflectsboththehigherprevalenceratesofmoderateriskandproblemgamblingamongtheIndigenouspopulationandmayalsoindicateagreaterwillingnesstotakeactiontoremedytheproblem.However,Indigenousrespondentsarenomorelikelytoseekhelpfromfamily,friendsorprofessionalservicesthantheirnon-Indigenouscounterparts.Interestingly,amuchhigherpercentageofIndigenousrespondentsstatedtheywouldaccessafreegamblinghelpprogramifitwereavailable (50%) than non-Indigenous respondents (�7%).

Attitudes to gambling

Indigenousrespondentsaresignificantlymorelikelytoagreethat“gamblingwinningsareusedtosupportfamilies”(21%)thannon-Indigenousrespondents(8%).

Household issues

Indigenousrespondentsaresignificantlymorelikelytobelivingwithapartner(37%)thannon-Indigenousrespondents(20%)andareslightlylesslikely(45%)tohavenevermarriedthantheirnon-Indigenouscounterparts (52%).

InspiteofthehigherrateofmoderateriskandproblemgamblingprevalenceamongIndigenousrespondents,gamblingissignificantlylesslikelytohavecausedargumentsinIndigenoushouseholds(59%)thaninnon-Indigenous households (78%).

Remote Indigenous communities

ResearchwasconductedamongremoteIndigenouscommunitiesatAurukun,PormpuraawandYarrabahintheQueenslandGulfcountry.Whilethecombinedresponsesforthesecommunitieswassmall46,theresearchnonetheless highlights some issues for future investigation.

The general gambling prevalence rates for these communities are seen in Table 1�.

Table 13 Community Corrections gambling prevalence in remote Indigenous communities

Gambling type Aurukun,Pormpuraaw,Yarrabah (%)

Total Indigenous

NonIndigenous

General Queensland population

Non gambler 16.7 18.4 14.4 19.7

Recreational gambler 25.0 �8.7 5�.7 72.4

Lowrisk 16.7 12.2 12.2 5.�

Moderaterisk ��.� 17.0 11.� 1.9

Problem gambler 8.� 1�.7 8.4 0.5

Atfirstglancetheproblemgamblerprevalencerateappearsencouraging,beinglessthantheoverallIndigenousrateof13.7percentandmoreinlinewiththenon-Indigenouscohort(8.4%).Itmustberemembered,however,thatthesecommunitiesdonothavereadyaccesstogamblingvenueswiththerangeofproductsavailabletothoseinlessremotecommunities.Inspiteofthislackofaccesstocommercialgamblingproducts,theproblemgamblerprevalencerateremainsnearly17timesthatofthegeneralQueenslandpopulation.

Anotherissueofinterestistheelevatedprevalenceofmoderateriskgamblers.At33percentthemoderateriskgroupisnearlytwicethatofthetotalIndigenoussampleandagainover17timesthatofthegeneralQueenslandpopulation.Asmanymoderateriskgamblersexperienceadverseimpactsofgambling,areatincreasedriskofgambling-relatedcriminalactivityandareeffectively‘atrisk’ofdevelopingproblemgamblingbehaviours,thisfiguremayindicatesomecauseforconcern.


Afurtherissueworthconsideringisthatthesamplepopulationfromtheseremotecommunitiesappearstobeless recreational in their gambling behaviour than the rest of the sample group. While recreational gamblers comprisethelargestgroupinthegeneralcommunity(72.4%),thenon-Indigenouscommunitycorrectionssample(53.7%)andtheIndigenoussample(38.7%),thisisnotthecasewiththeremoteIndigenoussample.At25percent,theprevalenceofrecreationalgamblinginthesecommunitiesrunssecondtomoderateriskgambling.

Onereasonforthesefiguresmaybefoundintheimportantplaceof“cardschools”inthesocialfabricofremoteIndigenouscommunities.Certainlythecurrentsurveyhighlightsthatcardplayingissignificantlymorepopular among Indigenous respondents than non-Indigenous. Card schools or card pits are regular community events based around card playing for money.

Commenting generally on the place of card schools in the remote communities the Corrective Services researcher noted:

The card school is very important to community members as it is the only time the community meets socially.Itisconsideredaveryimportantinteractivemeetingwiththegoingsonbetweenpeoplediscussed. Politics of the community are also brought up and discussed. Some of the most popular andfrequentlyplayedgamesare“3card”,“25”,“Cutem”and“Koocan”.

ReportingspecificallyaboutthecardschoolsatAurukun,theresearchercommented:

ThereareregulardaysforcardschoolsinAurukunthatcoincidewiththereceiptof“sitdownmoney”(Governmentbenefits).

TheAurukunCommunityJusticeGroupcoordinatoradvisedthatgamblingwinningscirculatearoundthecommunityandthereforestayinthecommunity.Thereisnotavoluntarysharingofwinningsbutitistakentosettlekinshiporpastclaims.Becauseofthemoneyspentongambling,thecommunitymembers cannot learn to plan or budget their money. Gambling is therefore an enormous problem in Aurukun.

AtarecentmeetingoftheAurukunJusticeGroupitwasrequestedthatajusticegrouppolicybeputinplace to ban a person from the canteen for interrupting the card school. This highlights the importance that community members place on the card school

Aswellasthefinancialimpactsofgamblingtherewerealsoreportsofgambling’sinfluenceondomesticviolence in the remote communities.

It appears that in these communities gambling may not simply be a recreational activity but an important facet ofsocialinteraction.Failuretotakepartmayrisksocialexclusion.AstheQueenslandGovernmentstrategyinrelation to problem gambling is largely premised on the fact that gambling is a recreational activity delivered commercially,adifferentapproachmayberequiredtodealwiththeproblemsassociatedwithgamblinginthese remote communities.

Attheveryleast,thereisaneedforfurtherresearchintotheplaceofcardschoolsandthesocialimpactofthese events in remote Indigenous communities.

4.2 Regional variants

Prevalence

TherewerenostatisticallysignificantregionalvariantsinregardtotheCPGIgamblinggroups.Ahigherpercentage of Metropolitan respondents reported as non gambler (2�.6%) compared to the average (15.1%). The highestpercentageofproblemgamblerswasfoundintheCentralRegion(13.2%comparedtotheaverageof9.4%).

Indigenous origin

WhileIndigenousrespondentscomprised19percentofthetotalsample,thepercentageofIndigenousrespondentsfromtheNorthernRegionwassignificantlyhigherat55percent

Gambling activity

PerhapsreflectingthehigherIndigenouscohort,theNorthernregionshowedamuchgreaterincidenceofcardplayinginthelast12monthsat16.2percentcomparedtothesampleaverageof9.8percent.Inanswertothequestion,“Whathaveyougambledmoston?”theNorthernrespondentsagainshowedsignificantlyhighercommitment to card playing at 7.2 per cent compared to the average of 1.6 per cent.

Southernrespondentsarestatisticallymorelikelytohavecommencedgamblingat18yearsorover(78%)thantheaverage(64%).Similarly,Southernrespondentsaresignificantlymorelikelytohavefirstgambledonpokermachines(46%)thanNorthernrespondents(27%).AsnotedaboveNorthernrespondentsaresignificantlymorelikelytohavefirstgambledwithcards(15%)thananyothergroup(at5%).

�0 Games People Play

Beliefs and attitudes to gambling

Inresponsetothestatement,“Ifapokermachinehasn’tpaidoutinawhilethenitmustbeduetopayout”,Metropolitanrespondentsaresignificantlylesslikelytoagree(19%)thantheirSouthern(37%)orNorthern(��%) counterparts.

Help seeking

SouthernRegionrespondentsaresignificantlymorelikelytoseekgambling-relatedhelpfromeithertheirCommunityCorrectionsCaseManager(41%)orthegovernmentfundedGamblingHelpservices(53%)thananyothergroup(24%and37%respectively).Southernrespondentsarealsothemostlikelytoseekhelpfromeachoftheotherstatedhelpsources.Similarly,Southernrespondentsaresignificantlymorelikelytoattendafree gambling help program (55%) than any other group (�7%). Metropolitan respondents are statistically the leastlikelytoaccesssuchaprogram(17%).

�1Problem gambling among offenders in Queensland Community Corrections

References

Albanese,M.andShaffer,H.“TreatmentConsiderationsinPatientswithAddictions”Primary Psychiatry (2003),10 (9)

Cooper,G.“ExploringandUnderstandingOnlineAssistanceforProblemGamblers:ThePathwaysModel”International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction,(2003)1(2)http:www.pasinfo.net/journal/v1i2/v1i2a04article.html

Crofts,P. Gambling and Criminal Behaviour. An Analysis of Local and District Court Files,(2002),CasinoCommunityBenefitFund,Sydney

Crofts,P.Researching the Link Between Gambling and Crime (2003)Paperpresentedto‘EvaluationinCrimeandJustice:TrendsandMethods’conference,AustralianInstituteofCriminology,Canberra24-25March2003.

Doley,R.Want to make a Bet? Gambling and Crime in Australia. (2000) Australian Centre for Policing Research

Ferris,J.andWynne,H. The Canadian Problem Gambling Index Draft User Manual(2001),CanadianCentreonSubstance Abuse

Hodgins,D.,Wynne,H.andMakarchuk,K.“PathwaystoRecoveryfromGamblingProblems:Follow-UpfromaGeneralPopulationSurvey”Journal of Gambling Studies (1999)15(2),93

Lahn,J.andGrabosky,P.GamblingandClientsofACTCorrectionsFinalReport(2003)CentreforGamblingResearch,RegulatoryInstitutionsNetwork,AustralianNationalUniversity

Nathan,P.“TheRoleofNaturalRecoveryinAlcoholismandPathologicalGambling”Journal of Gambling Studies 19 (�) 200�

PricewaterhouseCoopers,Serious Fraud in Australia and New Zealand (200�) Australian Institute of Criminology

ProductivityCommission1999,Australia’s Gambling Industries, ReportNo.10,Ausinfo,Canberra

Problem Gambling Prevalence Survey 2002,DepartmentofCorrectiveServices

Queensland Household Gambling Survey 2001 (QHGS),(2002)QueenslandTreasury

Queensland Responsible Gambling Strategy,(2002),QueenslandTreasury

Rockloff,M.andSchofield,G.“FactorAnalysisofBarrierstoTreatmentforProblemGambling”Journal of Gambling Studies(2004)20(2),122

Sakurai,Y.andSmith,R.Gambling as a Motivation for the Commission of Financial Crime,(2003)AustralianInstitute of Criminology

Watt,N.Law of the Flies: Problem Gambling and its Impact on the Law in Queensland (awaiting publication 2005)


Appendix ACommunity Corrections/Custodial Corrections gambling type comparisons

ThetablesbelowprovidecomparisonsbetweentheproblemgamblingprevalencesurveysamplesofthepresentCommunityCorrectionsstudyandthe2002CustodialCorrectionssurvey.Theinformationreflectsthedemographicprofilesoftherelevantpopulationgroups.Somecharacteristicsarenotdirectlycomparableacrossthetwosamplesduetodifferencesinthesurveyinstrumentsusedtocollectthedata.

Table 14 Non-gambling group Community Corrections/Prison population comparisons

Non-gambling group Community Corrections Prison population

Prevalence 15.1% 8.4%

Gender 82% male18% female

60% male40% female

Indigenous status 22% Indigenous78% non-Indigenous

67% Indigenous��% non-Indigenous

Age range 71% up to �528.7% �5-540% 55 and over

5�% 18-�440% �5-547% 55 and over

Marital status 47% never married19% defacto7% married27%divorced/separated/widowed

5�% never married27% defacto1�% married

Country of birth 75.9% Australia 80% Australia

Highest education level 45% year 10 or less�7% up to Year 1218% post secondary

87% completed Year 10 or less

Work status 28%full-timework�8% unemployed12% pension4%CommunityDevelopmentEmploymentProject(CDEP)25% part-time or casual

20%full-timework20% unemployed20% pension20%CDEP

Income* 36%<$10,000perannum43%$10,000-$40,00022%$40,000+

73%<$10,000perannum

* Some attributed more than one income source

Table 15 Recreational gambling group Community Corrections/Prison population comparisons

Recreational gambler group

Community Corrections Prison population

Prevalence 51.1% 48.�%

Gender 77% male2�% female

56% male44% female

Indigenous status 1�% Indigenous87% non-Indigenous

�9% Indigenous61% non-Indigenous

Age range 78% up to �519% �5-54�% 55 and over

60.5% up to �5�6% �5-54�.5% 55 and over

Marital status 55% never married22% defacto8% married12%divorced/separated/widowed3%unspecified

50% never married20% defacto19%divorced/separated/widowed

��Problem gambling among offenders in Queensland Community Corrections

Country of birth 75.9% Australia 80% Australia

Highest education level 45% year 10 or less�7% up to Year 1218% post secondary

87% completed Year 10 or less

Work status 28%full-timework�8% unemployed12% pension4%CDEP25% part-time or casual

20%full-timework20% unemployed20% pension20%CDEP

Income* 36%<$10,000perannum43%$10,000-$40,00022%$40,000+

73%<$10,000perannum


Table 16 Low risk gambling group Community Corrections/Prison population comparisons

Low risk gambler group Community Corrections Prison population

Prevalence 12.2% 1�.5%

Gender 8�% male17% female

54% male46% female


��% Indigenous67% non-Indigenous

Age range 84% up to �515% �5-541% 55 and over

70% up to �5�0% �5-540% 55 and over

Marital status 5�% never married25% defacto2% married17%divorced/separated/widowed3%unspecified

54% never married��% defacto

Country of birth 91% Australia 92% Australia

Highest education level 58% year 10 or less��% up to Year 126% post secondary

42% completed Year 10 or less33%VocationalEducationandTraining(VET)12.5% post secondary

Work status 30%full-timework�0% unemployed14% pension4%CDEP17% part-time or casual7% retired/other

21%full-timework47% unemployed

Income* 34%<$10,000perannum53%$10,000-$40,0009%$40,000+4%unspecified

55%<$20,000perannum30%$80,000+(obtainedillegally)



Table 17 Moderate risk gambling group Community Corrections/Prison population comparisons

Moderate risk gambler group Community Corrections Prison population

Prevalence 12.�% 12.4%

Gender 77% male2�% female

7�% male27% female


45% Indigenous55% non-Indigenous

Age range 74% up to �526% �5-540% 55 and over

77% up to �52�% �5-540% 55 and over

Marital status 46% never married25% defacto2% married25%divorced/separated/widowed2%unspecified

45% never married41% defacto


Highest education level 62% year 10 or less29% up to Year 127% post secondary

45% completed Year 10 or less27%VET14% post secondary

Work status 20%full-timework��% unemployed14% pension6%CDEP�0% part-time or casual6% retired/other

21%full-timework27.5% unemployed27.5% pension


51%<$30,000perannum41%$80,000+(obtainedillegally)


Table 18 Problem gambling group Community Corrections/Prison population comparisons

Problem gambler group Community Corrections Prison population

Prevalence 9.4% 17.4%

Gender 82% male18% female

61% male�9% female


�5% Indigenous65% non-Indigenous

Age range 7�% up to �524% �5-54�% 55 and over

58% up to �5�9% �5-54�% 55 and over

Marital status �8% never married�0% defacto7% married22%divorced/separated/widowed3%unspecified

�9% never married�2% defacto16% separated/divorced


Highest education level 56% year 10 or less22% up to Year 1222% post secondary

52% completed Year 10 or less26% completed senior16%VET6.5% tertiary


Work status 24%full-timework44% unemployed19% pension2%CDEP10% part-time or casual9% retired/other

26%full-timework42% unemployed25% pension


49%<$30,000perannum42%over$80,000+(obtainedillegally)



Appendix BSurvey instrument

Q.1 How old are you? (Age last birthday) years

Q.2 Are you male or female? Male Female

Q.3 What is your postcode? _ _ _ _

Don’tknow/can’tremember Refuse

Q.4 Where were you born?

Australia

UK/Ireland

NewZealand

Vietnam

Other(specify)……………………………………………….

Q.5 Are you of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin?Are you of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin?

Yes,Aboriginalorigin Yes,TorresStraitorigin

No

ForpersonsofbothAboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderorigin,tickboth“Yes”boxes

Q.6 What is the main language spoken at home? (Please tick(Please tick one box)one box)

English

Chinese

Greek Vietnamese

Italian

Other(specify)……………………………………………….

Q.7 What is your marital status? (Please tick(Please tick one box)one box)

Married

Livingwithpartner Separated/divorced

Never married

Widowed


Q.8 In the past 12 months have you played any of these?(Pleasetick everything you have played)

Pokies(pokermachines) .....................................................................

Betonhorses,dogsorotheranimals .................................................

Sports betting (other than animals) ....................................................

Bingo ..................................................................................................

Internet gambling ...............................................................................

Card games (for money other than casino) ..........................................

Dice games (for money other than casino) ...........................................

Instant Scratch-Its ...............................................................................

GoldLotto,Powerball,OzLotto,GoldenCasket ...................................

Kenoatacluborhotel ........................................................................

Blackjack,Roulette,oranyotherCasinogame ....................................

Othergame–pleasewritedownitsname ...........................................

I have not played any of these in the last 12 months - Go to Q11

Q.9 In the past 12 months what have you gambled the most on? (Pleasetick only oneonly one box)

Pokies(pokermachines) .....................................................................

Betonhorses,dogsorotheranimals .................................................


Bingo ..................................................................................................



Dice games (for money other than casino) ...........................................

Instant Scratch-Its ...............................................................................

GoldLotto,Powerball,OzLotto,GoldenCasket ...................................

Kenoatacluborhotel ........................................................................


Othergame–pleasewritedownitsname...........................................

Howmanytimesperweekdoyouusuallyplayontheactivityyou’vechosen?(Pleasetick only oneonly one box)

Lessthanonceperweek Onceaweek 2-3timesperweek

4-5timesperweek 6-7timesperweek More than 7 times

About how long do you play each time you gamble on that activity?(Pleasetick only oneonly one box)

Less than one hour 1-2 hours �-4 hours Over 4 hours


…and,abouthow much moneydoyouspendeachtimeyougambleonthatactivity?(Pleasetick only oneonly one box)

Lessthan$20 $20-$39 $40-$59 $60ormore

Doyougamblewiththingsother than money?(eg.cigarettes,alcohol,artwork,favours)

Yes No

Ifyes,whatdoyougamblewith?………………………………………………….

Q.10 How much do you think the following statements apply to you?(please tick(pleasetick one box for each statement)

Inthelast12months, I have bet more than I could afford to lose.

No,never Yes,rarely Yes,sometimes Yes,often Yes,always

In the last 12months, I have needed to gamble with larger amounts of money to get the same feeling of excitement.


Inthelast12months,I have gone back another day to try to win back the money I lost.


Inthelast12months, I have borrowed money or sold something to get money to gamble..


Inthelast12months,I have felt I might have a problem with gambling. have felt I might have a problem with gambling..


Inthelast12months,gamblinghascausedmehealthproblems(includingstress,anxiety)..


In the last 12 months, other people have criticised my betting or told me they think I have a gambling problem..


Inthelast12months,mygamblinghascausedfinancialproblemsformeormyhousehold(eg.Ihavebeenunable to pay bills)..


Inthelast12months, I have felt guilty about the way I gamble or what happens when I gamble..



Q.11 Do you agree or disagree with the following statements.Do you agree or disagree with the following statements. (Pleasetick one box for each statement)

Whilegambling,afterlosingmanytimesinarow,youaremorelikelytowin.

Agree Disagree Don’tknow

Ifapokermachinehasn’tpaidoutinawhilethenitmustbeduetopayout.


Whilegambling,youcanwinmoreifyouuseasystemorstrategy.


Ifyoucontinuegamblingintheend,youwilllose.


Q.12 When you were a child growing up:

Did any of the adults in your household gamble?


How did people in your household feel about gambling

Therewasnogambling Theythoughtitwasbad Theythoughtitwasnormal

Theythoughtitwasagoodthing

Q.13Ifyouhavegambled,atwhatagedidyoustartgambling?

Less than 5 years old 5-9 years old 10-14 years old 15-17 years old 18 years or older

Onwhattypeofactivitydidyoufirstbetorgamble?(Pleasetickonlytheoneyoufirstplayed)

Pokies(pokermachines) ....................................................................

Betonhorses,dogsorotheranimals.................................................


Bingo .................................................................................................



Dice games (for money other than casino)...........................................

Instant Scratch-Its ..............................................................................

GoldLotto,Powerball,OzLotto,GoldenCasket...................................

Keno at a club or hotel ........................................................................


Other game–pleasewritedownitsname...........................................

I have never gambled on anything ......................................................


Q.14 In the last 12 months have you tried to exclude yourself from a gambling venue (asked the venue not to let you back in)?

No,never Yes,andvenuekeptmeout Yes,butvenueletmebackin

Q.15 In the last 12 months have you ever sought help with problems related to gambling?

No,never Yes,Isoughthelpandreceivedhelp Yes,Isoughthelpbutreceivednohelp

Q.16Ifyouneededhelpforproblemsrelatedtogambling,wherewouldyougo?(youmaytick more than one box)

To my family .......................................................................................

To friends ...........................................................................................

To respected members of the community ............................................

To a doctor or psychologist .................................................................

To a church minister/priest .................................................................

To my Community Corrections case manager ......................................

To local counselling & support services ..............................................

To Gambling Help Services/Gambling Help Line .................................

Idon’tknowwheretogethelp ...........................................................

Other (please specify) ........................................................................

Q.17 The following statements are about gambling generally. How much do you agree or disagree with each one?(pleasetick theanswerthatbestdescribeswhatyouthink)

Gambling provides harmless amusement for people.

I strongly disagree I disagree I have no opinion I agre I strongly agree

People who gamble regularly win money.


Gambling winnings are used to support families.


Gambling takes too much money out of the community.


Overall,gamblingcausesmoreharmthangood.


Q.18Inthelast12months,hasyourpartnergambled?

I have no partner........................................................................................ Go to Q.19

My partner has not gambled in the last 12 months ..................................... Go to Q.19

Yes,mypartnerhasgambledinthelast12months


(Please tick everything you think your partner has played)

Pokies(pokermachines) ....................................................................

Betonhorses,dogsorotheranimals.................................................


Bingo .................................................................................................



Dice games (for money other than casino)...........................................

Instant Scratch-Its ..............................................................................

GoldLotto,Powerball,OzLotto,GoldenCasket...................................

Keno at a club or hotel ........................................................................


Other game–pleasewritedownitsname...........................................

Q.19Inthelast12months,hasgamblingcausedargumentswithinyourhousehold?(pleasetick one box only)


Q.20 Which of the following best describes how you currently get your income? (pleasetick one box only)

workfull-time CDEP

part-time/casualwork sickordisabilitypension

child support

retired

unemploymentbenefits other,pleasedescribe…………………………………………………………….

Q.21 What is your approximate annual income? (pleasetick one box only)

Lessthan$10,000

$10,000-$19,999

$20,000-$29,999

$30,000-$39,999

$40,000-$49,999

$50,000-$59,999

$60,000-$69,999

$70,000-$79,999

$80,000+


Q.22 What is the highest level of education you have completed? (pleasetick one box only)

No formal schooling (Year 7 or less)

Year 10 or less

Year 11

Year 12

VET/TAFE

Degree

Post-graduatequalification

Q.23Inthelast12months,haveyoueverfeltseriouslydepressed?

Yes No Don’tknow/can’tremember Refuse

Q.24Inthelast12months,haveyouusedalcoholordrugswhilegambling?


Q.25Doyoufindthatyougamblemorewhileundertheinfluenceofalcoholordrugs?


Q.26 Were any of your current offences committed to get money to gamble or pay gambling debts?


Q.27 Have you ever committed a crime to obtain money to gamble or pay gambling debts?


Q.28Haveyouevercommittedacrimetoobtainmoneytopaysomeoneelse’sgamblingdebts?


Q.29 Has gambling ever caused you to do something that was wrong or illegal?


Ifyes,whathaveyoudonethatwaswrongorillegal?____________________

Q.30 If a free program was available to assist you with gambling problems would you be interested in participating?

Yes No Don’tknow Refuse

That is the end of the survey. Thank you very much for completing it. If you have any comments you would like to make about this survey or about gambling please do so on the next page.

COMMENTS…................................................................................................................................

Officeuseonly

S1 SE RG IC ST

S2 IM NM IF NF

games people play - publications · 2018. 11. 10. · 6 games people play help seeking the vast...

Documents