• Casino Self Exclusion Form Singapore Rules
• Casino Self Exclusion Program
• Casino Self Exclusion Form Singapore Iras

Self-exclusion is one of the most widely used responsible gaming strategies. These programs allow individuals to literally “exclude” themselves from a gaming venue as a way of dealing with problematic gambling behavior. Scientific research on the safety and effectiveness of self-exclusion is just now catching up to the establishment of such programs, which began more than a decade ago.

Self exclusion forms Apply for self-exclusion from a gaming venue. Model Self-Exclusion Scheme Deed - MS Word version DOC, 72.5 KB. Model Self-Exclusion Scheme Deed PDF, 29.38 KB. Model Self-Exclusion Scheme Deed - Arabic PDF, 118.51 KB. Model Self-Exclusion Scheme Deed - Korean PDF, 128.35 KB. The information contained in the self-exclusion request or list, except for a willfully unlawful disclosure of such information. I am voluntarily requesting exclusion from all gaming activities at all Mille Lacs Band Gaming Properties. I certify that the information that I have provided above is true and accurate.

Self Exclusion Program FAQ. What is Self-Exclusion? Self-Exclusion is a process that allows a person to request to be banned from all legalized gaming activities and to be prohibited from collecting any winnings, recovering any losses or accepting complimentary gifts or services or any other thing of value at any licensed facility.

The NCRG’s Aug. 16 webinar, “Regulating Interventions for Disordered Gambling: What New Research Says about the Safety, Effectiveness and Logistics of Self-Exclusion Programs,” will feature research by Robert Ladouceur, Ph.D., C.A.S., professor of psychology, Laval University, Quebec. (Click here for more details or to register for this free, one-hour program.) This month’s Issues & Insights highlights selected peer-reviewed studies in this emerging area of research.

1. The full set of Regulations are available without charge, and updated monthly, at the Singapore Government Statutes' website. Advertising - The list of Designated Tourist Attractions referenced to in the Casino Control (Advertising) Regulations 2010 be can found here. Casino Licence and Fees Casino Layout Casino Marketing Arrangements.
2. Your name will remain on the self-exclusion list and you will be excluded from casino gaming activities at all casino gaming establishments regulated by the Board for a minimum of five (5) years. After the expiration of five years from the date you received written notice of self-exclusion from the Board, your name will remain on the self.

Self-exclusion programs provide a way for a person to voluntarily ban him or herself from a casino as a way to deal with a gambling problem. These programs can be mandated by the government or voluntarily established by casinos and other gaming operators. For example, casinos that are members of the American Gaming Association, which represents commercial casinos in the United States, are required by the association’s Code of Conduct to provide their guests with the option to self-exclude. Under most self-exclusion agreements, the individual risks trespassing charges if she or he attempts to return to the casino and forfeits any winnings. The casino agrees to remove the self-excluded person from its direct mail lists, and many programs require a lifetime ban. However, some governments and casinos are experimenting with shorter bans because clinicians and researchers have expressed concerns that a lifetime ban may prevent people from enrolling.

Researchers are interested in what motivates an individual to enroll in a self-exclusion program because the act of enrollment represents treatment-seeking behavior. Since only a fraction of the population with a gambling problem seeks external assistance, understanding why gamblers choose to enter a self-exclusion program will help inform treatment strategies for disordered gambling. A 2010 study, “Motivators for resolving or seeking help for gambling problems: A review of the empirical literature,” found that self-excluders were motivated by a weighing of the pros and cons of gambling and the desire to regain control over their gambling as well as concern about the impact on relationships and financial difficulties (Suurvali, Hodgins, & Cunningham).

The Missouri Gaming Commission, which created the Missouri Voluntary Exclusion Program (MVEP) in 1995, has made its data available to researchers, resulting in several publications. For example, researchers analyzed the Missouri enrollment data from the perspectives of age and gender (Nower & Blaszczynski, 2006, 2008). In “Characteristics of problem gamblers 56 years of age or older: A statewide study of casino self-excluders,” they reported that older adult self-excluders typically began gambling in midlife, experienced gambling problems around age 60, reported preferences for nonstrategic forms of gambling (e.g., slot machines) and identified fear of suicide as the primary reason for enrolling in the MVEP (Nower & Blaszczynski, 2008). In another study of the MVEP, “Characteristics and gender differences among self-excluded casino problem gamblers: Missouri data,” Nower and Blaszczynski observed that female self-excluders were more likely than males to be African American, older at time of application, and either retired, unemployed or otherwise outside the traditional workforce (2006). In addition, female self-excluders were more likely to report a later age of gambling onset, a shorter period between onset and self-exclusion, a preference for non-strategic forms of gambling and prior bankruptcy.

The Harvard Medical School faculty at the Division on Addictions, Cambridge Health Alliance, conducted a two-phase research project on the MVEP. As reported in “Missouri casino self-excluders: Distributions across time and space,” a geographic and time-based analysis of the 6,599 people who applied to exclude themselves from Missouri casinos between 1996 and 2004 demonstrated that the epicenters of disordered gambling were the Western region around Kansas City and the Eastern region around St. Louis (LaBrie, Nelson, LaPlante, Peller, Caro, & Shaffer, 2007). The authors observed that the annual number of self-exclusion enrollments increased during the first few years of the MVEP before leveling off during the later years, suggesting a process of adaptation to the presence of casinos in Missouri.

The second phase of the Harvard study, as reported in the article, “One decade of self exclusion: Missouri casino self-excluders four to ten years after enrollment,” focused on the effectiveness of the MVEP by assessing the experiences of a sample of Missouri self-excluders for as long as 10 years after their initial enrollment in the program (Nelson, Kleschinsky, LaBrie, Kaplan, & Shaffer, 2010). According to this study, most of the self-excluders had positive experiences with MVEP and reduced their gambling and gambling problems after enrollment. However, half of the 15.9 percent of the self-excluders succeeded in trespassing at Missouri casinos after enrollment, indicating that the benefit of MVEP was attributable more to the act of enrollment than enforcement.

Dr. Robert Ladouceur and his colleagues at Laval University also have conducted extensive research on the effectiveness of self-exclusion. Their studies of a self-exclusion program in a Quebec casino demonstrated the promise of this approach for helping individuals reduce problem gambling behaviors (Ladouceur, Jacques, Giroux, Ferland, & Leblond, 2000; Ladouceur, Sylvain & Gosselin, 2007). Their most recent study (Tremblay, Boutin, & Ladouceur, 2008) is the first to evaluate efforts to make self-exclusion a therapeutic program (e.g., providing counseling support to enrollees) rather than just a legal agreement about trespassing. The authors observed major improvements in the study sample between the initial and final evaluation in terms of the amount of time and money they spent gambling, the consequences of their gambling, scores on the criteria for diagnosing pathological gambling and levels of psychological distress.

Such findings appear to support the notion of self-exclusion as a gateway to treatment. In their 2007 publication, Blaszczynski, Ladouceur, and Nower argued for a unifying structure for self-exclusion programs as a gateway to treatment based on a system operated by independent educators. These educators would inform individuals of the purpose of self-exclusion, establish links and access to supplementary services and monitor and report the effectiveness of the overall program.

Although these studies reveal the promise of self-exclusion, all identify the need for larger sample sizes in future research to determine more definitively the effectiveness of self-exclusion as an intervention for disordered gambling.

Despite this interest in self-exclusion as a therapeutic program or harm reduction strategy, self-exclusion programs administered by governments are technically considered legal agreements with penalties for self-excluders who violate the terms of the contract. For example, self-excluders can be arrested for trespassing or fined if caught on the premises of a casino in many jurisdictions. Self-exclusion has raised questions among legal specialists about the responsibility and liability of the gaming operator. Self-excluders have initiated lawsuits in cases where the casino did not enforce the ban (Faregh, & Leth-Steensen, 2009; Czegledy, 2009). Questions such as, “Who is responsible if a self-excluded person gains entry to a casino and goes bankrupt?” and “Should casinos withhold winnings from self-excluded patrons?” have been posed in several court cases (Rhea, 2005). Some also have questioned whether self-exclusion agreements even meet the legal standards of an enforceable legal contract (Napolitano, 2003).

Although most of the peer-reviewed research on self-exclusion is focused on the U.S. and Canada, studies on this intervention have been conducted all over the world. Both peer-reviewed and “grey” literature (publications that are not peer-reviewed, such as government reports) indicate that self-exclusion has been studied in Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, South Africa and the United Kingdom (Breen, 2005; Townshend, 2007; Haefeli, 2005; O'Neil, Whetton, Dolman, et al., 2003; Collins, & Kelly, 2002; Jackson, & Thomas, 2005).

If you are interested in learning more about self-exclusion research, note that two upcoming educational programs will focus on translating several of the studies cited above for a non-scientific audience. First, Dr. Robert Ladouceur will present his findings from the self-exclusion program in Quebec during the NCRG Webinar, “Regulating Interventions for Disordered Gambling: What New Research Says about the Safety, Effectiveness and Logistics of Self-Exclusion Programs.”This free, one-hour webinar will be held onAug. 16, 2010, at 2 p.m. (EDT), and also will feature Kevin Mullally, J.D., general counsel and director of government affairs at Gaming Laboratories International,and the developer of Missouri Voluntary Exclusion Program. Advance registration is required.

Casino Self Exclusion Form Singapore Rules

Second, the next volume of the NCRG’s publication series, Increasing the Odds: A Series Dedicated to Understanding Gambling Disorders, focuses on research about self-exclusion, providing summaries of several of the articles cited above, written for a non-scientific audience. This free publication will be available in October 2010.

References

Blaszczynski, A., Ladouceur, R., & Nower, L. (2007). Self-exclusion: A proposed gateway to treatment model. International Gambling Studies, 7(1), 59-71.

Breen, H., Buultjens, J., & Hing, N. (2005). Evaluating implementation of a voluntary responsible gambling code in Queensland, Australia. International Journal of Mental Health & Addiction, 3(1), 15–25.

Collins, P. & Kelly, J. (2002). Problem Gambling and Self-Exclusion: A Report to the South African Responsible Gambling Trust. Gaming Law Review, 6(6), 517-531.

Czegledy, P. (2009). The Legal Risk of Problem Gambling. Gaming Law Review and Economics, 13(3), 233-240.

Haefeli, J. (2005). Swiss experience with self-exclusion programs. Presented at the Niagara Falls Self Exclusion Panel, Niagara Falls. Retrieved from http://www.responsiblegambling.org/articles/jorg_hafeli_discovery_2005.pdf

Jackson, A., & Thomas, S. (2005). Clients' perspectives of, and experiences with, selected Australian problem gambling services. Journal of Gambling Issues, 14. Retrieved from http://jgi.camh.net/doi/full/10.4309/jgi.2005.14.7

LaBrie, R. A., Nelson, S. E., LaPlante, D. A., Peller, A. J., Caro, G., & Shaffer, H. J. (2007). Missouri casino self-excluders: distributions across time and space. Journal of Gambling Studies, 23(2), 231-243.

Ladouceur, R., Jacques, C., Giroux, I., Ferland, F., & Leblond, J. (2000). Analysis of a casino's self-exclusion program. Journal of Gambling Studies,16(4), 453-460.

Ladouceur, R., Sylvain, C., & Gosselin, P. (2007). Self-exclusion program: a longitudinal evaluation study. Journal of Gambling Studies, 23(1), 85-94.

Napolitano, F. (2003). The self-exclusion program: legal and clinical considerations. Journal of Gambling Studies,19(3), 303-315.

Nelson, S. E., Kleschinsky, J. H., LaBrie, R. A., Kaplan, S., & Shaffer, H. J. (2010). One decade of self exclusion: Missouri casino self-excluders four to ten years after enrollment. Journal of Gambling Studies,26(1), 129-144.

Nower, L., & Blaszczynski, A. (2006). Characteristics and gender differences among self-excluded casino problem gamblers: Missouri data. Journal of Gambling Studies,22(1), 81-99

Nower, L., & Blaszczynski, A. (2008). Characteristics of problem gamblers 56 years of age or older: a statewide study of casino self-excluders. Psychology and Aging, 23(3), 577-584.

O'Neil, M., Whetton, S., Dolman, B., Herbert, M., Giannopoulos, V., O'Neil, D., & Wordley, J. (2003). Evaluation of Self-exclusion Programs. South Australian Centre for Economic Studies. Retrieved from http://www.justice.vic.gov.au

Rhea, A. (2005). Voluntary Self Exclusion Lists: How They Work and Potential Problems. Gaming Law Review, 9(5), 462-469.

Suurvali, H., Hodgins, D.C., & Cunningham, J.A. (2010). Motivators for resolving or seeking help for gambling problems: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26, 1-33.

Townshend, P. (2007). Self-exclusion in a Public Health Environment: An Effective Treatment Option in New Zealand. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 5(4), 390-395.

Responsible Gaming

The Seminole Tribe of Florida takes a leadership position on responsible gaming. We took the initiative to reach out to the Florida Council on Compulsive Gambling (FCGG) and together we created Gamble With Care a comprehensive array of programs that ensure a safe and entertaining gaming environment.

We have instituted a policy that prohibits individuals under 18 years of age from taking part in Live Poker or Bingo. An additional policy is in place that restricts individuals under 21 years of age from participating in any other form of casino gaming.

To protect the well-being of Florida's youth, we have established policies that prevent our adult guests from bringing their children into gaming areas or leaving them unattended anywhere on-property. Failure to comply with our clear-cut policies may result in a guest losing their privilege to game.

To assure that we are responsible vendors of alcohol, we founded the Service Intervention Program (SIPs).

To make sure our guests return home safely, we founded the Safe Ride Program. Look for Safe Ride signs and ask for more information at valet points as well as security podiums.

To support those individuals with a compulsion to gamble, we implemented a Self-Exclusion Program, whereby guests can voluntarily have themselves prohibited from our properties.

In addition, we are proud to help fund 1.888.ADMIT.IT, Florida's 24-hour toll-free helpline for casino players with a compulsion to gamble.

Gamble With Care is part of our culture and heritage at The Seminole Tribe of Florida. We have always been, and continue to be honored to uphold a position of leadership when it comes to responsible gaming.

Prevent Underage Gambling and the Consumption of Alcohol

Seminole Casino policy prohibits individuals under 18 years of age from taking part in Live Poker or Bingo. Individuals under 21 years of age are prohibited from taking part in any other form of casino gaming. Minors attempting to utilize false identification will be prosecuted.

Tribal law prohibits anyone under the age of 21 to consume alcoholic beverages.

At no time does the casino take responsibility of unattended minors. Failure to comply may result in action from the casino to exclude the parent or guardian of the child from the premises. Unattended minors may be handed over to the Seminole Police Department if a parent or guardian cannot be located in a reasonable amount of time.

If you should find a child left unattended, please do the following:

Casino Self Exclusion Program

• Notify the Security Department immediately at ext. 1177.
• Stay with the child; do not remove them from the area until a member of the Security Department arrives. The child may have been given special instructions by his/her parent or guardian to stay in that area until they return.

Service Intervention Program (SIPs)

Our mission is to be a responsible vendor of alcohol and to ensure the enjoyment and safety of our guests and employees.

SIPs helps to provide our employees with the skills, knowledge and support to ensure world-class guest service.

We review in detail:

• The fundamental facts about alcohol
• Its effects on the body
• How to recognize over-indulgence
• How to intervene when necessary
• Protecting the best interest of our guest & liability
• Valid forms of ID for alcohol sales

Self-Exclusion Program

What is the Self-Exclusion Program?
The program was established to allow people with a gambling problem to voluntarily exclude themselves from casino gambling activities in all Seminole Tribe of Florida Casinos. In addition, an ejected individual may not enter any of the gaming facilities (such as Hard Rock Live or any other venue in Seminole Paradise) or any of the restaurants located inside Seminole gaming facilities.

Casino Self Exclusion Form Singapore Iras

How do I get placed on the Self-Exclusion list?
You can contact a Security Representative in person or by phone who will provide you with information and an application to enter the Self Exclusion Program. After completing the application you will be required to provide photo identification that includes your signature. When you file the form in person you will be photographed. That photo and other identifying information will be distributed to all Seminole Casinos.

Can I just mail back the completed form?
Yes. You can mail the Self Exclusion Request Packet to the Seminole Casino Security Department nearest you or return the application form in person to a Security Representative.

What will happen if I go to a casino and try to gamble?
After you are placed on the self-exclusion list, Casino personnel will refuse to accept your wagers or ask you to leave the gaming area. If you do gamble, you would be unable to collect any winnings or recover any losses. Once you are placed into the program you will not be able to receive complimentary goods or services, credit or check cashing privileges or offered any other amenities by the casino.

How long will I be on the self-exclusion list?
That’s up to you. When you request self-exclusion, you will choose whether you want to be excluded for a minimum of one year, five years or for life. If you choose the one-year or five-year option, you must remain on the list for that length of time. Removal from the self-exclusion list will occur automatically at the conclusion of 1 year and 5 year self-exclusions. Lifetime self-exclusions may appeal to have their name removed from the exclusion list only after five (5) years has expired. After that time expires, you may ask to be removed from the list or to be readmitted by writing a letter to the Seminole Tribal Gaming Commission.

To help individuals in their time of need, we collaborated with the Florida Council on Compulsive Gambling (FCCG). They are available for counsel 24-hours a day at 1.888.ADMIT.IT (236.4848).