Problem gambling and economic abuse against women: an adaptive grounded theory analysis

Abstract

Problem gambling provides a strong motivation for perpetrating economic abuse. This study explores the interaction between problem gambling and economic abuse, and how this economic abuse is reinforced by other forms of intimate partner violence (IPV) and underpinned by gendered drivers of violence against women. Interviews were conducted with 18 women with lived experience of economic abuse perpetrated by a male partner with a gambling problem and analyzed using adaptive grounded theory. The women reported that their partner subjected them to numerous forms of economic exploitation (e.g. fraudulent use of her credit card) and economic control (e.g. preventing her from accessing money) to fund his gambling. Patterns of psychological and physical abuse reinforced this economic abuse. Gendered drivers of this violence underpinned this behavior including their partner’s perceived entitlement to subordinate, control, and manipulate them. The resulting financial stress undermined the women’s capacity to leave the relationship, extending their victimization and deprivation. This integrated exploration highlights that problem gambling and gendered drivers of violence interact to create a context where economic abuse and other forms of violence are perpetrated to obtain money for gambling. Interventions by gambling operators, financial institutions, and support services are needed to reduce gambling-related economic abuse.

Keywords:

• Financial abuse
• domestic violence
• family violence
• gender
• gambling disorder
• intimate partner violence

Acknowledgments

This material was produced with funding from the Australian Government and the Australian state and territory governments. Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS) gratefully acknowledges the financial and other support it has received from these governments, without which this work would not have been possible. The findings and views reported in this paper are those of the authors and cannot be attributed to the Australian Government, or any Australian state or territory government.

We sincerely thank all the participants in this study. We also acknowledge Annabel Taylor, Andrew Frost, Nancy Greer, Rebecca Jenkinson, Angela Rintoul, Julie Deblaquiere, Uma Jaktar, Jamie Lee, Alun Jackson, Erika Langham, and Vijay Rawat for assisting with the interviews. We thank our research partners who helped to source research participants and provided general guidance for the study: Relationships Australia Queensland, Relationships Australia South Australia, Relationships Australia New South Wales, Relationships Australia Australian Capital Territory, Women’s Health in the North, Salvation Army Crossroads Family Violence Service, and Cairns Regional Domestic Violence Service.

Ethical approval

Ethics approval for this project was gained from multiple Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs). These were CQUniversity HREC (20852), Relationships Australia New South Wales HREC (111217-4), UnitingCare Queensland HREC (22618), and the Australian Institute of Family Studies (reciprocal approval). All participants provided informed consent and were provided with contact details of relevant help services. Risk management protocols were developed with formalized procedures for situations of imminent threat to the participant or others; concerns of child abuse, neglect, or risk of harm; disclosure of illegal activity or other situations which risk serious harm; and interviewer safety.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest.