Description
Background - Objective :
A new gambling law came into effect in Switzerland on January 1 2019 with the aim to harmonize the previous law and open up the online casino market. Article 81 of this new law stated that after being excluded in Switzerland from online gambling and casinos, a person can request the lifting of the exclusion when the reason for exclusion no longer exists. It is envisaged that a specialist or a specialized service recognized by the canton will be involved in the process of lifting the exclusion.
The aim of this study is to describe the intervention models associated with the lifting of exclusions related to the implementation of the Gambling Act in seven Latin cantons (Fribourg, Geneva, Jura, Neuchâtel, Ticino, Valais, Vaud).
Method :
Identification and analysis of the framework documents issued by the canton investigated under Art. 81 of the Gambling Law, and the development of a semi-structured questionnaire for specialists designated by each canton to be “associated” in the words of the Gambling Law, with the lifting of exclusions. Transcription of interviews and application of a thematic analysis technique outlined by Braun and Clarke for our study.
Results :
Two French-speaking canton apply a clinical intervention model in indicated prevention, with no direct impact on the casino’s decision to lift the exclusion or not, and five cantons have an expertise-focused intervention model that includes providing advice to the casino. Among these two models, some variations are observed between different cantons, particularly with regard to the location, the number of lifting interviews, and the sharing of information between casinos and the specialists involved in the lifting process.
All respondents felt that the interventions are well accepted and raise awareness of specific risks, even when the intervention model is oriented towards expertise rather than indicated prevention. The perceived potential for improvement concerned standardizing communication between the casino and the mandated specialist, the number of conducted interviews, a second interview at 2-3 months after the lifting decision, allowing for supplementary post-intervention support, the possibility of streamlined process for self-exclusion to encourage this modality and the importance of conducting interviews in help locations to facilitate potential future assistance.
Conclusion :
Beyond the two main intervention models in the context of lifting gambling exclusions, the investigation carried out allows to identify divergences and convergences and to obtain qualitative feedback of the feasibility and acceptability of these models, with a two-year retrospective view form the implementation of the new law.
| Contact Geneva Health Forum | I would like to receive information about the GHF 2024 conference and other GHF activities / Je souhaite recevoir des informations sur la conférence GHF 2024 et d'autres activités du GHF. |
|---|
