Problem Gambling and Intimate Partner Violence

Abstract

This study provides a systematic review of the empirical evidence related to the association between problem gambling and intimate partner violence (IPV). We identified 14 available studies in the systematic search (8 for victimisation only, 4 for perpetration only and 2 for both victimisation and perpetration). Although there were some equivocal findings, we found that most of the available research suggests that there is a significant relationship between problem gambling and being a victim of IPV. There was more consistent evidence that there is a significant relationship between problem gambling and perpetration of IPV. Meta-analyses revealed that over one third of problem gamblers report being victims of physical IPV (38.1%) or perpetrators of physical IPV (36.5%) and that the prevalence of problem gambling in IPV perpetrators is 11.3%. Although the exact nature of the relationships between problem gambling and IPV is yet to be determined, the findings suggest that less than full employment and clinical anger problems are implicated in the relationship between problem gambling and IPV victimization and that younger age, less than full employment, clinical anger problems, impulsivity, and alcohol and substance use are implicated in the relationship between problem gambling and IPV perpetration. The findings highlight the need for treatment services to undertake routine screening and assessment of problem gambling, IPV, alcohol and substance use problems, and mental health issues and provide interventions designed to manage this cluster of comorbid conditions. Further research is also required to investigate the relationship between problem gambling and violence that extends into the family beyond intimate partners.

Gambling and violence in a nationally representative sample of UK men

“…Most research to date has used treatment-seeking samples or convenience samples with an explicit focus on problem gamblers [21] and alcohol and drug research seldom has a gambling focus [45].…”

“…Thus, these problem and/or pathological gamblers are not representative of problem gamblers in the community, and a broader range of gamblers is seldom considered [21].…”

“…However, comorbid alcohol or drug problems, and more particularly the two combined attenuated these relationships to a greater extent [9]. Hence, although impulse control problems and mental health problems can go some way in explaining the relationship between violence and gambling (the roles of factors such as impulsivity and mental health issues in problem gambling have been speculated on elsewhere [9,14,15,17], along with more persistent violence [20][21][22]), it is the latter (comorbid substance abuse) that seems even more important in explaining links that are more personalised, persistent and deleterious [15,17,25,26]. A coherent more holistic approach to understanding the interactions between these various issues is required.…”

“…Furthermore, alcohol and substance use disorders have also been shown to be highly comorbid with problem gambling [21][22][23][24]. However, few studies have investigated the relationship between IPV perpetration and problem gambling and whether alcohol and/or other substance misuse may be a covariate [9,15,[25][26].…”

Binge-drinking and non-partner aggression are associated with gambling among Veterans with recent substance use in VA outpatient treatment

“…For example, among Veterans, gambling has been associated with suicidal ideation and attempts (Kausch, 2003a, 2003b; Kausch, 2004), substance use and SUDs (e.g., alcohol use and use disorders; Desai et al, 2004; Edens & Rosenheck, 2012; Kausch, 2003a; Potenza, Maciejewski, & Mazure, 2006; Rash, Weinstock, & Van Patten, 2016; Westermeyer et al, 2005; Westermeyer et al, 2008), and with psychiatric disorders (e.g., depression, anxiety; Edens & Rosenheck, 2012; Westermeyer et al, 2005; Westermeyer et al, 2008). Similarly, violence and aggression (e.g., partner and non-partner violence; aggressive behavior; family violence) have been associated with both pathological and problem gambling among civilians (Parke & Griffiths, 2004; Korman et al, 2008; Goldstein et al, 2009; Adachi & Willoughby, 2013; Suomi et al, 2013; Roberts et al, 2016; Dowling et al, 2014; Dowling et al, 2016), and data from a nationally representative sample in the United States (US) showed that the odds of violent behavior are significantly greater among individuals with gambling problems (Pulay et al, 2008). Further evaluation contextualizing the co-occurrence of violence with gambling and in SUD samples, particularly among Veterans, could inform clinical efforts with such patients.…”