Abstract
An important consequence of adoption of public health approaches in the field of gambling studies has been the increasing emphasis afforded to gambling harm. Reducing or eliminating harm has now become the overt stated mission of many government foundations and funding bodies. A by-product of these developments has been the gradual reduction of references to terms capturing the nature of the primary disorder (problem or pathological gambling or gambling disorder) in preference for what are considered to be more neutral or less ‘stigmatising’ terms (e.g. ‘people with gambling harm’). In this paper, we argue that this conflation of gambling harm with the disorder is misguided. Not only does it fail to acknowledge the validity of the disorder but it is also unjustified by evidence and may have unintended negative consequences for both people affected by gambling and the field more generally. In particular, we focus on the clinical and legal advantages of adherence to an individual-centred, pathology model of gambling disorder.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
