Abstract
Gambling is an addictive behaviour that causes significant harms to individuals, families and societies. Problematic gambling can have profound impacts on family life, including financial destitution and relationship breakdown. In addictive relationships, addictive behaviour dominates over other social commitments.
The COVID-19 pandemic had important implications on family life and gambling behaviours. This is likely to have affected family relationships in families experiencing gambling harms. The current study uses evidence from a qualitative survey (N=39) and interviews (N=5) collected with family members of gamblers to explore how family members of gamblers experienced addictive relationships during the COVID-19 pandemic in Finland.
The results show that gambling negatively affects intimate relationships, relationality and interdependencies in families. For many, gambling-related harms were accentuated by the intensification of addictive relationships during the pandemic. For others, availability restrictions of gambling brought relief. The results also show a need for more family-oriented help services and highlight the importance of prevention.
Introduction
Addictive behaviours and consumption affect those engaging in them, but also their family members and communities. Gambling is an addictive behaviour that severely affects family members and other concerned significant others (CSOs). Every gambler experiencing problems is estimated to negatively affect the lives of between five and 17 CSOs (Valentine and Hughes, 2010; Goodwin et al, 2017; Sulkunen et al, 2019; Tulloch et al, 2021).
Problematic gambling disrupts family life and complicates intimate relationships (Valentine and Hughes, 2012; Järvinen-Tassopoulos, 2020). The most important harms experienced by family members of gamblers include serious financial problems, as well as emotional and relationship harms such as family breakdown. Family members have also been reported to experience deteriorating physical and mental health, unemployment and substance abuse (Grant Kalischuk et al, 2006; Svensson et al, 2013; Dowling et al, 2014a; 2014b; Salonen et al, 2016; Jeffrey et al, 2019; Riley et al, 2021; Tulloch et al, 2021). These harms are very similar to those experienced by gamblers themselves. Some harms, particularly mental health and relationship harms, can also be more severe among family members than among those engaging in gambling (Jeffrey et al, 2019).
The severity level of the harms experienced by CSOs depends on their relationship with the gambler. Spouses and children are often the most severely affected and in the most vulnerable position (Valentine and Hughes, 2010; Järvinen-Tassopoulos, 2020; Riley et al, 2021). In marriages and couples, anxiety, hypervigilance, divorce and family violence have been connected to problematic gambling (Riley et al, 2021). Problematic gambling can reduce intimacy between family members. The gambling parent may withdraw from household chores and childcare responsibilities or stop contributing financially (Valentine and Hughes, 2010; 2012). Spouses experiencing harm from gambling may also withdraw from other social relationships due to shame and stigma (Ferland et al, 2008). Problematic gambling can permanently reduce levels of trust between spouses, particularly the non-gambling spouse who can find it difficult to trust their gambling spouse again (Dickerson-Swift et al, 2005). At the same time, gambling spouses can underestimate or even ignore the impacts of their gambling on family members (Landon et al, 2018; Jeffrey et al, 2019; Riley et al, 2021).
Underage children of individuals with problematic gambling are in a particularly vulnerable position (Valentine and Hughes, 2012). Children often suffer silently from parental gambling problems and the chaotic and unpredictable behaviours these problems can engender (Valentine and Hughes, 2010; Riley et al, 2021). Parental gambling problems and the tensions these cause in a family may have long-lasting impacts on the physical and mental wellbeing of children (Dowling, 2014; Saugeres et al, 2014; Lane et al, 2016; Järvinen-Tassopoulos and Marionneau, 2021). Children harmed by problematic gambling suffer from difficulties at school and have high levels of substance use (Riley et al, 2021). Children of families with problematic gambling also have a high risk of experiencing gambling problems later in life (Dowling et al, 2010; Riley et al, 2021).
Besides the immediate family, friends and extended family members may experience harms due to the problematic gambling of others. These include parents, grandparents or grown children of older parents (Patford, 2007a; Salonen et al, 2016; Goodwin et al, 2017; Järvinen-Tassopoulos and Marionneau, 2021). However, the severity of harms is usually higher among the most intimate family members.
The onset of COVID-19 in March 2020 had wide-ranging impacts on gambling behaviours as well as on family relationships. Gambling venues and other public spaces were closed to limit the spread of the virus. As a result, the levels of gambling consumption and related harms were reduced among those gambling in land-based environments (for example, Brodeur et al, 2021; Hodgins and Stevens, 2021). For many of those who engaged in online gambling before the pandemic, the pandemic also translated to increased gambling participation and harm (Gainsbury et al, 2021; Hodgins and Stevens, 2021; Xuereb et al, 2021; Marionneau and Järvinen-Tassopoulos, 2022; Shaw et al, 2022). At the same time, the social distancing measures increased time spent at home with the family. The pandemic strained family relationships and deteriorated the wellbeing of families (Gayatri and Irawaty, 2022).
Little research has been conducted on the experiences of family members and CSOs during the pandemic. Two studies from Italy (Donatti et al, 2022; Passarella et al, 2023) have found that despite the stress and worsened emotional states caused by lockdowns, CSOs experienced relief and some improvements in family relationships. Improvements were attributed particularly to the limited availability of gambling during the pandemic and the ensuing reduced participation in gambling. However, family members were also apprehensive about the reopening of gambling opportunities and possible relapse (Donatti et al, 2022; Passarella et al, 2023). Donatti et al (2022) also noted that despite the cessation of gambling during lockdowns, some families continued to experience gambling harms, including physical and psychological symptoms. Whether these findings also apply to other contexts is not yet known. Countries differed in their COVID-19 responses but also in terms of the availability of gambling, as well as the prevalence of land-based or online formats of gambling.
In the current study, we explore how CSOs of individuals gambling at problematic levels experienced the COVID-19 pandemic in Finland. Unlike the strict lockdown measures implemented in Italy, Finnish COVID-19 restrictions consisted of recommendations. One previous study from Finland (Marionneau and Järvinen-Tassopoulos, 2021) looked at the experiences of gamblers and CSOs regarding the closures of gambling help and support services during the first wave of COVID-19. The study showed that gamblers and CSOs had less need for services because the closures of land-based gambling opportunities had translated into reduced gambling behaviour.
The current article focuses on the experiences of CSOs during spring 2021, one year into the pandemic. We ask how COVID-19 and related changes in the gambling environment challenged family members and CSOs of individuals with problematic gambling to redetermine their roles and relations within families and with gambling.
Addictive gambling: impacts on family relationships
Families and intimate relationships are based on relationality (for example, Smart, 2007; 2011; see also Finch and Mason, 1993) and interdependencies (Elias, 1978). Individuals are moulded by their close relations with others. Human interdependencies and relationality exist in different societal fields (for example, economics and politics), but most importantly within intimate family ties.
The idea of relationality does not always denote a positive relationship (Mason, 2004; Smart, 2007). Complex configurations formed by human ties contain built-in tensions alongside cooperation and harmony (Elias and Dunning, 1966; Elias, 1978). Commitments and expectations are actively negotiated and created in relationships (Finch and Mason, 1993). Relationality forms the context of everyday life, but it also requires action; relating (or not relating) is always active (Smart, 2007). Family life is a multidimensional process of negotiating issues, layers and meanings (Smart, 2011). These processes differ across family members and families.
Addiction and addiction-related harms can have significant impacts on family dynamics. A person struggling with addiction can resort to addictive behaviour to control their feelings (for example, sadness, guilt, fear, resentment), but they can also develop a tolerance towards the addiction. This can lead to an escalation of addictive behaviour. Following Peter Adams (2010), an intensification of addictive consumption can then lead to a deterioration of other connections, or even to a disconnection in other relationships, including intimate family relationships. According to Adams (2010: 42), ‘the main threat to the integrity of a system of [social] connections is the process of fragmentation, [as] this process involves the progressive intensification of one relationship, which leads to corresponding reductions in the significance of other relationships’.
An individual engaging in addictive behaviour may remain in a relationship with their family members, but their connection to the addictive consumption becomes the ‘central axis around which other relationships operate’ (Adams, 2010: 49). Commitment to relationships with other people fit into this system if others do not threaten the addictive relationship and if other relationships contribute to its survival (Adams, 2010). In Simmel’s (1972) words, addiction is ‘a stranger’ in intimate relationships that gradually takes over other, pre-existing intimate commitments. Addiction can therefore change priorities within the family. This has an impact on the person’s identity: instead of identifying via their social relationships, they now identify via their addictive relationship. As Adams (2010: 51) describes, an ‘addictive system’ is a system where the relationship to an addictive substance or consumption ‘ends up dominating all other points of connection’.
When an addictive relationship forms within a family, the family is challenged to adjust and adapt, or to exclude and sideline the addictive relationship. If families decide to adjust, they are then faced with a long process of reforming, regulating and adapting their identity to include the addictive relationship (Adams, 2010). This changes the family relations and interdependencies.
Study and method
Context
The current study focuses on how family interdependencies and relations were affected by addiction during a time of crisis, characterised by the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic and related restrictions on social movements. In Finland, like elsewhere, COVID-19 had profound impacts on the social landscape and gambling opportunities. Land-based gambling venues were closed to prevent the spread of infection, while social distancing recommendations led to reduced movement in public spaces and increased time spent in homes.
All legal gambling in Finland, land-based and online, is provided by a monopoly operator. However, the monopoly has also been criticised for making gambling widely available and accessible to the population. Before the pandemic, gambling and gambling-related harms in Finland were strongly characterised by highly addictive and widely available electronic gambling machines (EGMs). Finland has a comparatively high per capita consumption of EGM gambling and a high per capita count of EGMs located in non-casino environments; EGM gambling also figures prominently in help-seeking statistics (for example, Bijker et al, 2022). Compared with other European countries, Finland has had a high, although declining, prevalence of gambling participation and problematic gambling (Calado and Griffiths, 2016; Gabellini et al, 2023). Finland also had a comparatively high prevalence of online gambling before the pandemic. According to a 2019 population study, 47 per cent of gamblers had gambled online in the previous year (Lind et al, 2021)
Data
The study draws from two qualitative datasets collected during the third wave of COVID-19 in Finland (early 2021). During this time, EGMs were, again, closed in most parts of the country. The datasets consist of an online survey and group interviews with CSOs. These were conducted separately with slightly different sampling. Difficulties in recruiting participants characterised the data collection process. This was probably because potential respondents were somewhat tired of COVID-19 one year into the pandemic. Furthermore, we were not able to compensate participants due to tax law issues.
Online survey
The survey was carried out by the University of Helsinki in collaboration with the Finnish Association for Substance Abuse Prevention. It was available from 16 February to 21 March 2021. The participants were recruited by advertising the questionnaire on social media and through associations that offer help and support services for individuals experiencing gambling harms. Two separate surveys were available: one for those who gamble and one for CSOs. Only the responses of CSOs were included in this analysis (N=39, of whom 29 were females, 8 males and 2 who did not wish to disclose their gender). Most of those who disclosed their relationship to the gambler were partners. Sample characteristics of survey respondents are presented in Table 1.
Sample characteristics of survey respondents
| Participant ID | Gender | Age group | Place of residence | Relationship to gambler |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 509857 | F | 65–74 | Western Finland | CSO |
| 510767 | F | 35–49 | Western Finland | Mother |
| 511135 | M | 65–74 | Eastern Finland | CSO |
| 511279 | – | 65–74 | Western Finland | CSO |
| 511306 | M | 65–74 | Western Finland | Partner |
| 511613 | F | 65–74 | Central Finland | Partner |
| 511619 | F | 35–49 | Central Finland | Partner |
| 511783 | F | 50–64 | Eastern Finland | Partner |
| 511957 | F | 18–24 | Western Finland | Partner |
| 512053 | F | 50–64 | Eastern Finland | CSO |
| 512458 | F | 35–49 | Eastern Finland | CSO |
| 512599 | F | 35–49 | Western Finland | Partner |
| 513073 | F | 18–24 | Eastern Finland | CSO |
| 513232 | F | 35–49 | Eastern Finland | Partner |
| 513247 | M | 18–24 | Eastern Finland | CSO |
| 513476 | F | 50–64 | Eastern Finland | CSO |
| 514198 | F | 50–64 | Eastern Finland | Other family |
| 519947 | F | 50–64 | Capital region | Parent |
| 520060 | M | 65–74 | Central Finland | CSO |
| 521033 | F | 65–74 | Southern Finland | CSO |
| 521126 | F | 35–49 | Western Finland | CSO |
| 521506 | F | 25–34 | Southern Finland | Partner |
| 522017 | M | 50–64 | Central Finland | CSO |
| 523898 | F | 35–49 | Capital region | Partner |
| 524492 | F | 25–34 | Central Finland | Partner |
| 527843 | F | 50–64 | Lapland | CSO |
| 528848 | F | 65–74 | Southern Finland | Partner |
| 530828 | F | 65–74 | Eastern Finland | CSO |
| 530933 | F | 35–49 | Western Finland | Partner |
| 530951 | F | 50–64 | Western Finland | CSO |
| 531044 | F | 35–49 | Southern Finland | Partner |
| 531484 | – | 65–74 | Southern Finland | CSO |
| 531797 | M | 35–49 | Southern Finland | CSO |
| 531994 | F | 65–74 | Lapland | CSO |
| 532519 | F | 50–64 | Southern Finland | Child |
| 534604 | F | 25–34 | Western Finland | CSO |
| 536390 | M | 25–34 | Central Finland | CSO |
| 536693 | M | 50–64 | Eastern Finland | CSO |
| 536948 | M | 50–64 | Central Finland | Parent |
The survey included questions about: (1) how the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic had affected the everyday lives of respondents; (2) the gambling behaviour of the gambling family member as well as possible changes in behaviour during COVID-19; (3) how the gambling of a family member, or changes in their gambling, had affected adult family relations and any children; and (4) how respondents would like to see gambling-related harms treated and prevented in the future. The questionnaire was available in Finnish and Swedish (the two official languages of Finland). Questions included multiple-choice and open-ended questions. As the number of respondents was relatively small, the analysis focused on open-ended questions. Quantitative data of the material is only given to illustrate trends.
Group interviews
The second dataset consists of two group interviews conducted with family members of individuals with gambling problems. Interviewees were recruited via help services and associations for gambling harms. All interviewees were female, and most were partners of gamblers. We used a wide age grouping to protect the identities of the participants. The sample characteristics of the interview participants are described in Table 2.
Sample characteristics of interview participants
| Group | Participant ID | Gender | Age group | Place of residence | Relationship to gambler |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | G1I1 | F | 30–65 | Capital region | Partner |
| G1I2 | F | 30–65 | Central Finland | Partner | |
| G1I3 | F | 30–65 | Central Finland | Partner | |
| Group 2 | G2I1 | F | over 65 | Capital region | Mother |
| G2I2 | F | over 65 | Capital region | Partner |
The interviews were organised in March 2021 via the Teams app. The online environment made participation easier but may have resulted in some apprehension among interviewees. The interviewer was a trained professional who tried to make the interviewees feel as comfortable as possible. The interviewer also encouraged participants to discuss the topics beyond the semi-structured interview questions.
Both group interviews lasted about 45 minutes. Interviewees were initially recruited via help services for gamblers and CSOs. The recruitment criterion was that participants were CSOs who had experienced harm due to the gambling of others. The data therefore differ in perspective from the survey data. Recruitment via help services may have resulted in a selection bias towards individuals who were already knowledgeable about gambling-related problems and relevant help.
The interviews focused on: (1) how CSOs of gamblers had experienced the prolonged COVID-19 situation and changes in gambling availability during this time; (2) closures as well as re-openings of EGMs and other gambling behaviours of their family member; (3) the harms that gambling caused in their family; (4) how the possible changes during COVID-19 had affected their lives; and (5) what kinds of help and treatment services CSOs would need for themselves or the gambling family member during and after COVID-19.
Research ethics
The data collection was part of a larger longitudinal research project on the experiences of gamblers and CSOs during COVID-19 in Finland. Ethics approval for the study was sought from the University of Helsinki Ethical Review Board. The board issued a statement that the study did not require ethics approval, as it did not fall under the remit of research designs that require ethical review according to the guidelines of the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity.
We did not seek respondents under the age of 18 as this would have resulted in a need for additional steps in terms of research permission, ethical approval and parental consent.
All participants in this study were given information about the study design. They were also informed that by participating, they were giving consent to the use of their answers in research. Participants were also given the contact information of the research team in case of any questions or if they wished to withdraw from the study at any time.
Methods
We conducted a qualitative content analysis of the interview data and the textual data (answers to open-ended questions) in the online survey. A qualitative content analysis aims to describe and conceptualise a method either inductively or deductively (Elo and Kyngäs, 2008). In our inductive approach, we first read the data and defined the research question. We then coded the data using the qualitative data analysis software Atlas.ti. These codes were then classified under categories that are reported in the results. The categories are (1) gambling in intimate relationships; (2) monetary harms and interdependencies; (3) the impacts of COVID-19 on gambling behaviour and harms; (4) the impacts of COVID-19 on family life; and (5) seeking and receiving help.
In addition to the qualitative analysis, descriptive statistics are given on the prevalence of trends and responses in the survey data. We also present excerpts from the interviews or survey responses to exemplify the analytical categories. Excerpts from data are marked by the gender and age group of participants. Translations from Finnish or Swedish to English are by the authors.
Results
Gambling in intimate relationships
‘There has been a lot of fighting. [My partner] stopped gambling one and a half years ago. We have been trying to deal with the accumulated lies and betrayal, but it’s really difficult to regain trust. […] It has been really exhausting for me, having to constantly watch what he is doing.’ (Female, 30–65 years, partner)
‘I have to watch for the signs to see when the gambling will start again. It has a massive impact on the dynamics of our relationship. I don’t like myself at all, I feel like a spy. I have to watch for the signs and try to see if he is gambling again. I try to control it. But of course, it’s no use.’ (Female, over 65 years, partner).
Constant vigilance can be exhausting, particularly for spouses. Consequently, intimate relationships suffer. The only perceivable possibilities for spouses are to either continue to help the gambler at the expense of personal wellbeing, or to distance themselves from the gambler and the relationship (see Adams, 2010). As one survey respondent described, “Gambling problems are like alcohol problems. You can’t let the problems of someone else exhaust you or throw you into financial distress” (female, 50–64 years, partner). The imbalance in the relationship caused by gambling can create a disconnection in the relationship from both sides: the gambler, choosing to gamble over the intimate relationship, but also the spouse, choosing their own wellbeing over continuing to help and support the gambler.
‘My partner has a pre-teenaged daughter. I think he has managed to protect her from this pretty well. But you know what kids are like. They notice things. We have had some really bad and miserable experiences, and if the atmosphere in the house is tense, she can sense it. She can see something is wrong with Dad. He does try to do his best and they do a lot of things together.’ (Female, 30–65 years, partner)
Monetary harms and interdependencies
‘It has been a financial loss for my son. And as a mother, I must pay his debts, because the debt gives him so much anxiety. I try to help; I might even be a bit overly protective sometimes. But now he has gotten used to being helped. And when I pay off his debts, soon after there is more debt. […] It also gives me anxiety because I keep fearing the next gambling spree.’ (Female, over 65 years, mother)
‘I don’t really have the energy anymore to take care of our finances alone or to keep watching him. He gives me most of his money and I take care of our finances […] Of course, I prefer doing it, because at least I know where the money goes […] Then if he needs something, I give him money. But for now, it’s better like this: I take care of all the finances.’ (Female, 30–65 years, partner)
The financial situation puts a two-fold strain on the relationship. On the one hand, financial hardship caused by gambling losses can create uncertainty within the family and force the entire family to reconsider their other financial engagements. “I don’t know how long I can stand it. In my opinion, we are in a financially violent relationship” (female, 25–34 years, partner), one respondent described. Another respondent (female, 35–49 years, partner) explained how “[w]e are a low-income couple, money spent gambling is always away from something else”. In some cases, gambling had caused important debt: “He brought our belongings to a pawnshop, maxed out two credit cards and took loans. This is not because of the pandemic, but because of the gambling problem. This happened after four years of abstinence” (female, 35–49 years, partner).
‘Money as a concept causes a lot of anxiety. When we talk about it and how we should use it, it causes strain. Although he does understand that I am thinking about what is best for him. I suppose it’s understandable that he has it at the back of his mind all the time, one way or another.’ (Female, 30–65 years, partner)
G2I1:With instant loans, it’s really problematic that nobody really checks if the customer can pay back his debt. Nobody checks for what reason they are borrowing money. If they knew it was for gambling, it should absolutely be prohibited to give an instant loan. (Female, over 65 years, mother)G2I2:My family member, he took a lot of instant loans for gambling. They are now all in the debt collection process. When he took the loans, they were openly available, nobody asked anything back then. And then he just used it all for gambling. After non-payment, they went to debt collection. Now he told me that he can’t get any more loans, he’s tried. I don’t know if somebody has started checking something. (Female, over 65 years, partner)G2I1:May I ask, if the loans are in a debt collection process, when will he repay them?G2I2:I don’t think he ever will. These are enormous amounts. It’s tough to pay back with a small retirement pension.
Impacts of COVID-19 on gambling behaviour and harms
While many gambling-related harms were already pre-existing, the COVID-19 pandemic brought about many changes. The most important impacts were related to changed gambling consumption. The online survey asked CSOs to report whether gambling or substance use (alcohol, tobacco) had increased or decreased in the family during the pandemic, in comparison to before. Figure 1 shows a summary of the responses. Results were split, with most respondents reporting no change in either gambling or substance use in the family, but some also reporting increases and decreases in consumption.
/img/Blank.svg)
Changes in gambling and substance use in families during COVID-19, reported by CSOs
Citation: Families, Relationships and Societies 14, 2; 10.1332/20467435Y2023D000000003
We also asked the respondents to describe these changes. The main reasons for reductions in the consumption of gambling and substances were related to reduced availability and accessibility, including closures of bars and gambling venues. The closures of land-based EGMs have also allowed some to limit their consumption. Many family members expressed relief over reduced gambling. For example, one survey participant explained, how their mother “has saved her pension now that the EGMs are closed” (female, 50–64 years, child). Another respondent reported that their son “has had more money for other use, he was even able to pay his share of the rent for the last two months” (male, 50–64 years, parent).
‘Gambling has increased and it has been partly replaced by loot boxes. Loot boxes give you the same excitement as an online scratch card. You never know whether you are going to get a good and valuable object from the box, or whether it is going to be an object without value. We have downloaded blocking software on every phone and laptop, but my partner still gambles on his work laptop at home and at work. He always finds a device on which he can gamble.’ (Female, 25–34 years, partner)
Constant advertisement was seen to further deteriorate the situation for those struggling with gambling. The gambling monopoly and offshore gambling websites alike were described as aggressive advertisers during the pandemic. One respondent described how online casinos are present everywhere on the internet, advertising “big stakes and big winnings if you sign up here and there. They come from absolutely everywhere” (female, over 65 years, partner).
G2I1:It has increased. Now that we spend more time at home and we don’t have much to do because of this pandemic, I notice that he gravitates towards gambling really easily. (Female, over 65 years, mother)G2I2:Yes, there is more stress, and gambling is a kind of amusement that he thinks will bring him joy. (Female, over 65 years, partner)
Impacts of COVID-19 on family life
COVID-19 and related lockdown measures had wide-ranging impacts on family life. We asked the survey respondents about the main effects of the pandemic on their everyday lives. The results are summarised in Figure 2. Many participants cited having experienced increased loneliness and increased free time due to the cancellation of hobbies and transferring to remote work.
Main impacts of the pandemic on the everyday lives of CSOs of gamblers
Citation: Families, Relationships and Societies 14, 2; 10.1332/20467435Y2023D000000003
‘Yes, we all have issues with our mental state at the moment. I just retired and I feel like everything is closed. I had so many plans for new hobbies and everything. And of course, it creates tensions in relationships. I think that this pandemic is a huge additional challenge for gamblers and their family members.’ (Female, over 65 years, partner)
‘We argue about money and the lack thereof. We also discuss sleeping because, at night, he wants to play online multiplayer games. Remote studying and gambling are not a good combination.’ (Female, 35–49 years, mother)
The loss of other social contacts, working from home, unemployment or furlough put further strain on relationships within families. Many described feeling bored and lonely at home and missing “friends with whom I could share my thoughts” (female, 30–65 years, partner). Some CSOs felt “more concerned and stressed […] because we don’t know how to help” (female, 18–24 years, partner). At the same time, the lack of social contacts also led to increased gambling in many cases. This caused a vicious cycle of illbeing in the family. “There are fewer social contacts and my spouse has become depressed. This has probably led to the worsening of his gambling addiction” (male, 50–64 years, CSO).
The lack of other social contacts emphasised the intimate relationship with the gambling family member. This caused further anxiety for family members who sought new ways to relate to each other. Family members had little choice but to confront each other and the stranger of problematic gambling in the family: “Normally, both of us have our own comings and goings, and the gambling problem is not constantly present in our everyday life. Since the pandemic, the problem is with us daily” (female, over 65 years, mother).
‘We have had more anxiety and quarrels and so on, and my partner always finds possible channels for his gambling. He has more cravings now than before, but we also talk about them more than before. At the beginning of our relationship, we did not talk at all.’ (Female, over 65 years, partner)
Seeking and receiving help
‘Peer support has been the best help available. I have participated in groups and found people in the same situation. I’ve made friends with them and been able to share my experiences. There is a need to further emphasise that CSOs should not be alone with this, that you should talk to anyone […] Because you end up in a kind of a bubble with the gambler. Somehow reality becomes distorted. It is important to find help.’ (Female, 30–65 years, partner)
The cancellation of many peer group appointments during the pandemic was considered highly problematic, as many had come to depend on this source of help for themselves and/or for the gambling family member. “It is a shame that some peer support groups are on hold, and not all gamblers are interested in participating in an online peer group,” one interview participant (female, over 65 years, mother) highlighted.
Besides these positive experiences with peer support, survey respondents were very critical of available possibilities for help and support for CSOs or gamblers. Some highlighted that “there is a need for help but receiving it and looking for it is more difficult” (female, 50–64 years, partner), while others explained that they did not know how to help their gambling family member or themselves.
‘I am from Central Finland, and we need more support groups and other kind of help. I have tried to contact the local Gamblers Anonymous, but I have never gotten hold of a counsellor. Sometimes we have been desperate for help, and as a partner, I feel that I have not always been heard.’ (Female, 30–65 years, partner)
‘At least in public healthcare, it seems that they do not really know how to face CSOs. The employees have neither enough information nor competence to deal with gambling problems. They see you as a support person who is here to help the gambler. They do not know how to find or provide help for a CSO.’ (Female, 30–65 years, partner)
‘As a family member, I have often experienced that the public healthcare and other people around don’t understand what I am going through on a daily or weekly basis. They don’t understand the process that one experiences because of an addiction that is perfectly legal and even socially acceptable.’ (Female, 30–65 years, partner)
‘It is very difficult to find help as a couple. I mean, we could go through the recovery process together. In principle, we can have individual help from mental health services and peer support groups, but neither the state nor help organisations nor peer support groups offer help for couples. We cannot recover together.’ (Female, over 65 years, partner)
Discussion
This article has focused on intimate relationships, relationality and interdependencies in families that have coped with gambling-related problems during COVID-19. The results have shown that many family members of gamblers have long-standing experiences of gambling harms that have preceded the pandemic. The stranger in the relationship, gambling, has caused a variety of financial, emotional and relationship harms to families. These findings echo many previous studies conducted among family members of gamblers (for example, Jeffrey et al, 2019; Riley et al, 2021; Tulloch et al, 2021). In particular, closest family members, such as spouses, suffer from priority imbalances (Adams, 2010) whereby the gambler prioritises their intimacy with gambling over relationships. At the same time, CSOs must prioritise the gambler over their own needs which causes further imbalances in the intimate relationship.
The COVID-19 period had diverging impacts on families struggling with problematic gambling. Our results are similar to those found earlier in Italy (Donatti et al, 2022; Passarella et al, 2023). Even though there was no mandatory lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic in Finland, the pandemic forced people to stay at home. The need to reorganise family life and the family home changed dynamics and feelings of intimacy (see Valentine and Hughes, 2012). For some, the restricted availability of land-based gambling translated into lessened harms and an improved quality of life. However, for most, gambling-related harms have been further accentuated by the pandemic. This was particularly the case in families where gambling took place online. These families experienced increased stress, when the stranger in the family, addiction, was joined by another stranger, the pandemic. An intensification of intimate relationships and personal mental health challenges during lockdowns and social distancing highlighted the addiction in the family. Families may have differed in terms of their coping strategies, but our data did not extend to analysing these.
Social networks and configurations are integral to human existence (Elias, 1978; Smart, 2011). Drastic limitations to these social contacts intensified life around the interdependencies with the gambling family member. The reduced numbers of other social contacts during the pandemic created a vicious cycle of illbeing: the lack of activities, hobbies and social contacts led to depression and increased gambling, which in turn led to increased financial loss and relationship harms in families.
The intensification of the addictive relationship affects all relationships in the family. Although spouses seem to bear most of the burden, our research highlighted that children are also affected, often more than adults believe. According to Adams (2010), the impact on children depends particularly on their age, the parent’s role and other support. In our data, many parents thought that children were oblivious to the gambling problem in the family and wanted to protect children by remaining silent. Yet, silence is unlikely to be a good strategy. Research in the field of substance abuse has shown that children of those addicted to substances are aware of the problems and wish for the silence in the family to be broken (Tedgård et al, 2019; Wangensteen et al, 2019). Our results suggest that the same applies to problematic gambling in families.
The pandemic has forced families to reconsider their relationships with each other but also to gambling. Addictive social systems are usually rigid and difficult to change. From the perspective of the individual engaging in addictive behaviour, their addictive relationship must be protected (Adams, 2010). The addictive system is therefore self-sustaining and resistant to change. During COVID-19, some families experienced relief due to the closure of harmful EGMs and reduced consumption of gambling (also Marionneau and Järvinen-Tassopoulos, 2021; Donatti et al, 2022; Passarella et al, 2023). In other families, problems with online gambling increased, but constant coexistence in the family allowed family members to be more aware of this and to offer support. The finding suggests that while change can be difficult, it is possible, particularly if the surrounding structural conditions support it.
Help and treatment were available for both gamblers and CSOs during the pandemic, although accessibility and availability had decreased (Marionneau and Järvinen-Tassopoulos, 2021). In our data, many respondents had had negative experiences of available help already before the pandemic. Help was hard to find, services were insufficient, and help did not correspond to the needs of families. These types of issues may have put even further strain on family members to act as unofficial helpers and carers for gamblers (see Patford, 2007b, 2009; Jiménez-Murcia et al, 2017). Our participants also had many suggestions for improving services. Notably, they highlighted a need to better train the personnel in public healthcare to respond to gambling-related problems in families. Some also called for more help to families. Previous research has shown that CSOs are often willing to help problem gamblers even at the cost of their own mental and financial wellbeing (Kalischuk, 2010; Holdsworth et al, 2013). Better help for CSOs was seen as an important factor in the recovery of the whole family.
The current study has been limited to exploring the experiences of 39 survey respondents and five interviewees in the context of Finland. The Finnish approach to COVID-19 was based on voluntary measures, with no enforced lockdowns. Our data had a relatively low number of respondents. Those participating in the interviews were also recruited through help associations. These factors may have caused bias and limitations in the interpretation of the results. A larger number of participants would have enabled us to conduct statistical analyses. Family members of problem gamblers appear to be a difficult group to reach for research, which may have excessively highlighted the experiences of a more select group of opinionated individuals.
Further studies should focus particularly on the protective factors that help families cope with addictive problems. As also noted by Valentine and Hughes (2010: 288), problematic gambling ‘is embedded in the “doing” of families’. Family members construct the problem of gambling through their relationships, and they are also able to redefine and rework the problem individually and as a family (Valentine and Hughes, 2010). There is also a need for more research on how gambling-related problems affect children and how parents attempt to shield children from these issues. Finally, there is more room to explore the possibilities of family therapy and family support in the help service networks for gambling harms.
Implications for practice/conclusion
Problematic gambling causes a wide range of financial, relationship and mental health harms in families. For many, these harms were accentuated during the pandemic. Untangling the manifold harms caused by gambling requires collaboration across services, families and policies. Families should be able to access low-threshold services, family help and professional treatment from public healthcare providers. Family members are willing to help the gambler, but this should not happen at the expense of their own wellbeing. Help and support services for gambling harms should better incorporate families. In addition to improved treatment, more preventive work is needed to limit the harms that gambling is causing in families. The results of this study have shown that availability restrictions of gambling translated to reduced harms in many families while aggressive marketing during the pandemic accentuated problems. The availability and visibility of gambling need to be targeted by public health-oriented policies to protect not only those who gamble but also their families.
Funding
The work of VM and JJT was supported by funding emanating from the Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health under Section 52 of the Finnish Lotteries Act. VM also reports funding from the Academy of Finland under Grant number 349589.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Katariina Mankinen for her help in collecting and conducting the interviews. We would also like to thank Riitta Matilainen and Eija Pietilä from the Finnish Association for Substance Abuse Prevention for their collaboration in the data collection for the online survey.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
References
Adams, P.J. (2010) Fragmented Intimacy. Addiction in a Social World, New York: Springer.
Bijker, R., Booth, N., Merkouris, S., Dowling, N. and Rodda, S. (2022) Global prevalence of help‐seeking for problem gambling: a systematic review and meta‐analysis, Addiction, 117(12): 2972–85. doi: 10.1111/add.15952
Brodeur, M., Audette-Chapdelaine, S., Savard, A.C. and Kairouz, S. (2021) Gambling and the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review, Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry, 111. doi: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2021.110389
Calado, F. and Griffiths, M.D. (2016) Problem gambling worldwide: an update and systematic review of empirical research (2000–2015), Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 5(4): 592–613. doi: 10.1556/2006.5.2016.073
Dickson-Swift, V., James, E. and Kippen, S. (2005) The experience of living with a problem gambler: spouses and partners speak out, Journal of Gambling Issues, 13: 1–22.
Donati, M.A., Capitanucci, D., Beccari, C., Smaniotto, R., Quadrelli, E., Casini, A. and Primi, C. (2022) What about affected family members of disordered gamblers during the COVID-19 pandemic? A study in Italy during the lockdown restrictions, Frontiers in Psychology, 13: doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.801835
Dowling, N. (2014) The Impact of Gambling Problems on Families, (AGRC Discussion Paper No. 1), Melbourne, Australian Gambling Research Centre.
Dowling, N., Jackson, A., Suomi, A., Lavis, T., Thomas, S., Patford, J., Harvey, P., Battersby, M., Koziol-McLain, J., Abbott, M. and Bellringer, M.E. (2014b) Problem gambling and family violence: prevalence and patterns in treatment-seekers, Addictive Behaviors, 39(12): 1713–17.
Dowling, N., Jackson, A., Thomas, S. and Frydenberg, E. (2010) Children At Risk Of Developing Problem Gambling, Melbourne: Gambling Research Australia.
Dowling, N., Rodda, S., Lubman, D. and Jackson, A. (2014a) The impacts of problem gambling on concerned significant others accessing web-based counselling, Addictive Behaviour, 39(8): 1253–7.
Elias, N. (1978) What is Sociology?, S. Mennell and G. Morrissey (trans) London: Hutchinson.
Elias, N. and Dunning, E. (1966) Dynamics of group sport with special reference to football, The British Journal of Sociology, 17(4): 388–402. doi: 10.2307/589186
Elo, S. and Kyngäs, H. (2008) The qualitative content analysis process, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1): 107–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
Ferland, F., Fournier, P.M., Ladouceur, R., Brochu, P., Bouchard, M. and Pâquet, L. (2008) Consequences of pathological gambling on the gambler and his spouse, Journal of Gambling Issues, 22: 219–29. doi: 10.4309/jgi.2008.22.5
Finch, J. and Mason, J. (1993) Negotiating Family Responsibilities, London: Routledge.
Gabellini, E., Lucchini, F. and Gattoni, M.E. (2023) Prevalence of problem gambling: a meta-analysis of recent empirical research (2016–2022), Journal of Gambling Studies, 39(3): 1027–57. doi: 10.1007/s10899-022-10180-0
Gainsbury, S., Swanton, T., Burgess, M. and Blaszczynski, A. (2021) Impacts of the COVID-19 shutdown on gambling patterns in Australia: consideration of problem gambling and psychological distress, J Addict Med. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000793
Gayatri, M. and Irawaty, D.K. (2022) Family resilience during COVID-19 pandemic: a literature review, Family Journal (Alexandria, Va.), 30(2): 132–8. doi: 10.1177/10664807211023875
Goodwin, B.C., Browne, M., Rockloff, M. and Rose, J. (2017) A typical problem gambler affects six others, International Gambling Studies, 17(2): 276–89. doi: 10.1080/14459795.2017.1331252
Grant Kalischuk, R., Nowatzki, N., Cardwell, K., Klein, K. and Solowoniuk, J. (2006) Problem gambling and its impact on families: a literature review, International Gambling Studies, 6(1): 31–60. doi: 10.1080/14459790600644176
Hodgins, D. and Stevens, R. (2021) The impact of COVID-19 on gambling and gambling disorder: emerging data, Curr Opin Psychiatry, 34(4): 332–43. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0000000000000709
Holdsworth, L., Nuske, E., Tiyce, M. and Hing, N. (2013) Impacts of gambling problems on partners: partners’ interpretations, Asian Journal of Gambling Issues and Public Health, 3(1): 1–14. doi: 10.1186/2195-3007-3-1
Järvinen-Tassopoulos, J. (2020) The impact of problem gambling: are there enough services for families with children?, Public Health, 184: 28–32. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.03.020
Järvinen-Tassopoulos, J. and Marionneau, V. (2021) Lapsen asema ongelmapelaajan perheessä: Mikä on ei-pelaavan vanhemman näkökulma? in J. Järvinen-Tassopoulos and H. Pirskanen (eds) Riippuvuus perheessä, Helsinki: Gaudeamus, pp 83–101.
Jeffrey, L., Browne, M., Rawat, V., Langham, E., Li, E. and Rockloff, M. (2019) Till debt do us part: comparing gambling harms between gamblers and their spouses, Journal of Gambling Studies, 35(3): 1015–34. doi: 10.1007/s10899-019-09826-3
Jiménez-Murcia, S., Tremblay, J., Stinchfield, R., Granero, R., Fernández-Aranda, F., Mestre-Bach, G. et al (2017) The involvement of a concerned significant other in gambling disorder treatment outcome, Journal of Gambling Studies, 33(3): 937–53. doi: 10.1177/10664807211023875
Kalischuk, R. (2010) Cocreating life pathways: problem gambling and its impact on families, The Family Journal, 18(1): 7–17. doi: 10.1177/1066480709357898
Landon, J., Grayson, E. and Roberts, A. (2018) An exploratory study of the impacts of gambling on affected others accessing a social service, International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 16(3): 573–87. doi: 10.1007/s11469-017-9785-4
Lane, W., Sacco, P., Downton, K., Ludeman, E., Levy, L. and Tracy, J.K. (2016) Child maltreatment and problem gambling: a systematic review, Child Abuse & Neglect, 58: 24–38. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.06.003
Lind, K., Marionneau, V., Järvinen-Tassopoulos, J. and Salonen, A.H. (2021) Socio-demographics, gambling participation, gambling settings, and addictive behaviors associated with gambling modes: a population-based study, Journal of Gambling Studies, 1–16. doi: 10.1007/s10899-021-10074-7
Marionneau, V. and Järvinen-Tassopoulos, J. (2021) Changes in treatment and help services for gambling during COVID-19: experiences of gamblers and their concerned others, Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 39(1): 10–24. doi: 10.1177/14550725211030727
Marionneau, V. and Järvinen-Tassopoulos, J. (2022) From habit-forming to habit-breaking availability: experiences of electronic gambling machine closures during COVID-19, Frontiers in Psychology, 12: 6184.
Marionneau, V., Egerer, M. and Raisamo, S. (2022) Frameworks of gambling harms: a comparative review and synthesis, Addiction Research & Theory, 1–8. doi: 10.1080/16066359.2022.2113071
Mason, J. (2004) Personal narratives, relational selves: residential histories in the living and telling, The Sociological Review, 52(2): 162–79. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954x.2004.00463.x
Passarella, G., Germoni, D., Bassi, A., Cabrini, S., Fagnoni, F. and Avanzi, M. (2023) The two gambling closures during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy: the impact on affected family members of disordered gamblers, Journal of Gambling Issues.
Patford, J. (2007a) The yoke of care: how parents and parents-in-law experience, understand and respond to adult children’s gambling problems, Australian Journal of Primary Health, 13(3): 59–68. doi: 10.1071/py07039
Patford, J. (2007b) Linked lives: adult children’s experiences of late onset parental gambling problems, International Journal of Mental Health and Addictions, 5: 367–80. doi: 10.1007/s11469-007-9077-5
Patford, J. (2009) For worse, for poorer and ill health: how women experience, understand and respond to a partner’s gambling problems, International Journal of Mental Health and Addictions, 7: 177–89. doi: 10.1007/s11469-008-9173-1
Riley, B.J., Harvey, P., Crisp, B.R., Battersby, M. and Lawn, S. (2021) Gambling-related harm as reported by concerned significant others: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of empirical studies, Journal of Family Studies, 27(1): 112–30. doi: 10.1080/13229400.2018.1513856
Roseneil, S. and Ketokivi, K. (2016) Relational persons and relational processes: developing the notion of relationality for the sociology of personal life, Sociology, 50(1): 143–59. doi: 10.1177/0038038514561295
Salonen, A.H., Alho, H. and Castrén, S. (2016) The extent and type of gambling harms for concerned significant others: a cross-sectional population study in Finland, Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 44(8): 799–804. 10.1177/1403494816673529
Saugeres, L., Thomas, A. and Moore, S. (2014) ‘It wasn’t a very encouraging environment’: influence of early family experiences on problem and at-risk gamblers in Victoria, Australia, International Gambling Studies, 14(1): 132–45. doi: 10.1080/14459795.2013.879729
Shaw, C., Hodgins, D., Williams, R., Belanger, Y., Christensen, D., El-Guebaly, N., et al (2022) Gambling in Canada during the COVID lockdown: prospective national survey, Journal of Gambling Studies, 38(2): 371–96. doi: 10.1007/s10899-021-10073-8
Simmel, G. (1972) The stranger, in G. Simmel (ed) On Individuality and Social Forms, Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, pp 143–9.
Smart, C. (2007) Personal Life. New Directions in Sociological Thinking, Cambridge: Polity.
Smart, C. (2011) Relationality and socio-cultural theories of family life, in R. Jallinoja and E.D. Widmer (eds) Families and Kinship in Contemporary Europe. Rules and Practices of Relatedness. Studies in Family and Intimate Life, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sulkunen, P., Babor, T., Cisneros Örnberg, J., Egerer, M., Hellman, M., Livingstone, C. , Marionneau, V., Nikkinen, J., Orford, J., Room, R. and Rossow, I. (2019) Setting Limits: Gambling, Science, and Public Policy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Svensson, J., Romild, U. and Shepherdson, E. (2013) The concerned significant others of people with gambling problems in a national representative sample in Sweden: a 1 year follow-up study, BMC Public Health, 13(1): 1–11. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1
Tedgård, E., Råstam, M. and Wirtberg, I. (2019) An upbringing with substance-abusing parents: experiences of parentification and dysfunctional communication, Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 36(3): 223–47. doi: 10.1177/1455072518814308
Tulloch, C., Browne, M., Hing, N. and Rockloff, M. (2021) The relationship between family gambling problems, other family stressors, and health indicators in a large population-representative sample of Australian adults, Journal of Gambling Studies, 37: 1139–62. doi: 10.1007/s10899-020-09990-x
Valentine, G. and Hughes, K. (2010) Ripples in a pond: the disclosure to, and management of, problem internet gambling with/in the family, Community, Work & Family, 13(3): 273–90. doi: 10.1080/13668803.2010.488107
Valentine, G. and Hughes, K. (2012) Shared space, distant lives? Understanding family and intimacy at home through the lens of internet gambling, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(2): 242–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-5661.2011.00469.x
Wangensteen, T., Bramness, J.G. and Halsa, A. (2019) Growing up with parental substance use disorder: the struggle with complex emotions, regulation of contact, and lack of professional support, Child & Family Social Work, 24(2): 201–08. doi: 10.1111/cfs.12603
Wardle, H. (2021) Games Without Frontiers? Socio-Historical Perspectives at the Gaming/Gambling Intersection, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Xuereb, S., Kim, H.S., Clark, L. and Wohl, M. (2021) Substitution behaviors among people who gamble during COVID-19 precipitated casino closures, International Gambling Studies, 21(3): 411–25. doi: 10.1080/14459795.2021.1903062
