Banning Gamblers

The Massachusetts House of Representatives barely passed the self-exclusion amendment which is not uncommon in other states and countries. Maybe it was an effort to please the Speaker who's pretty cozy with the Industry or a failure of members to inform themselves of surrounding issues.

What is rather interesting in the article below is the lengths to which others are willing to go to protect families and expedite a sensible solution.


Casino exclusion orders to be approved faster

FAMILIES will now be able to get their relatives with gambling problems barred from casinos, just two weeks after they apply for it.

This comes after changes to the application process by the National Council of Problem Gambling (NCPG).

Acting on feedback that six weeks was too long, the NCPG has more than halved the processing time by ensuring that a hearing date is set for each case once someone contacts the council for a family exclusion order.

Earlier, families and subjects of the exclusion order would have to go through counselling, and have a detailed 25-page report on their circumstances submitted before a hearing date could be set.

This part of the process is often the most time-consuming, said Tanjong Pagar Family Service Centre senior counsellor Charles Lee, because problem gamblers can be uncooperative and delay the hearing by skipping appointments.

With the new process, a hearing date is set even before the counselling is done, and regardless of whether the gambler turns up or not, a decision can be made based on the family's input.