A Comprehensive Guide to Self-Exclusion in Online Betting

In the first week of 2024, the famous American television news magazine Broadcast – 60 Minutes ran an episode on problem gambling in the US, following the tech wagering boom that has been occurring in the country in the last few years. The show highlighted the dangers of gambling addiction. Those worries have been prevalent in Europe for longer, as the Old Continent is a much more developed online gambling region. These concerns led to the UK Gambling Commission adopting GamStop, a nationwide self-exclusion database run by a non-profit organization named the National Online Self Exclusion Scheme Limited. The system implementation had gotten planned since 2017, but its establishment underwent several delays, eventually going live in March 2020.

After the launch of GamStop, other European Internet gambling markets saw the benefits of creating similar databases, and others almost identical ones to GamStop popped up in nations like Sweden and Germany. Hence, self-exclusion has gotten a lot of light cast on it post-2020. In the past, few online casinos would ever highlight it. But now, seemingly every operator has gotten pushed into promoting it to its users, advising them to take advantage of this responsible gambling feature if necessary.

What is Self-Exclusion & How to Self-Exclude

Some people have trouble controlling their impulses and are likelier to act upon urges than others. Those are the ones that often fall prey to addictions. In the gambling sphere, when someone feels that they are no longer in control of their betting activity, they may impose a self-inflicted ban that stops them from continuing wagering. Therefore, these systems aim to stop problem gamblers from betting again within self-designated periods.

Note that self-exclusion is also available in the land-based sphere, but the effectiveness of these systems in that part of the gambling sector has been called into question by many, as these restrictions are super hard to enforce in the land-based sphere. Online, that is more feasible, especially with nationwide schemes like GamStop.

For someone to request a self-exclusion ban, they must contact their selected operator and express a desire to have such a restriction put in place. That occurs via email or through an option available on a user’s profile page. Once the staff reviews, processes, and approves the request, the gambler’s account will get suspended for the chosen period. The time-frames available will vary from site to site, and they usually start at a month and go up to five years. Sometimes, even a permanent ban can get enforced.

By activating a voluntary self-exclusion, bettors are preventing further financial self-harm for a set period, in which they will hopefully learn how to regain control of their betting habits. They can do that via self-help books, therapy, helplines, support groups, etc.

The Difference Between Universal & Site-Specific Self-Exclusion

The databases talked about above, such as UK’s GamStop, are what gamblers call universal schemes. These are slowly becoming the norm in regulated European markets. Sweden has Spelpaus, operated by the Swedish Gambling Authority, offering bans of one, three, or six months, and this system has an option that the restriction can last until a gambler decides otherwise. In Germany, that country’s database bears the name Oasis. And in Australia, you have BetStop – the National Self-Exclusion Register.

These are universal networks, meaning that when someone self-excludes from, let us say, a Swedish gambling website through Spelpaus, they can no longer sign up with any betting platform regulated by the Swedish Gambling Authority. So, that person can no longer gamble online in Sweden because Swedish sites require identity verification upon registration, as operators licensed by the Swedish Gambling Authority get obligated to verify customer identity before allowing them to access their services. 

Site-specific self-exclusion is usually on hand at Curacao-licensed hubs, which accept gamblers from various regions on the globe. These online casinos and sportsbooks also follow through with bans requested by their users, which can only be active on their sites. There is no Curacao nationwide self-exclusion network. For now, only developed Internet gambling regions with government-created regulators that only accept gamblers from within their borders have universal self-exclusion systems. Licensors that allow platforms to have a diverse international gambler pool do not yet have such networks.

Online Self-Exclusion Challenges & Considerations

In previous years, a gambler could bet with another family member’s identity, supplying that person’s ID (a copy of) and their proof of address (utility bill not older than three months). But, recently, regulators have started asking for selfies and videos of people with said documents. Specific operators may even demand that a user gets on a video call to verify their identity. While that does not ensure that anyone’s identity gets misused, it is still better than what was in place before.

Concerning universal self-exclusion, the problem is that these systems are not that universal. They are nationwide. Even if the person has properly identified themselves, a UK gambler with an active GamStop ban can still easily find a platform operating in international waters, accepting users from Britain, or they can bet at an unlicensed site. Thus, such a compulsive bettor can still keep wagering online despite an activated UK self-exclusion, rendering this restriction useless if he does not have proper self-control.

There is currently little to no collaboration between regulatory bodies around the planet. The same applies to industry stakeholders and support organizations. That is a must if the global sector wants to enhance the effectiveness of self-exclusion programs. Moreover, there is no uniformity in self-exclusion policies and procedures worldwide. One region has one set of rules and self-exclusion durations, and another has others. There are no best practices defined.

Licensors should force operators to invest in studies that will look to discover what works best in minimizing the harms associated with problem gambling. Today, everyone is just following the lead of the UK Gambling Commission, replicating how this organization chooses to handle online gambling. There is also a lack of awareness or understanding of what self-exclusion is, and many gamblers do not want to admit that they are facing an impulse control issue, disclosing this problem to their chosen operator. That generates concerns about the privacy/confidentiality of personal information provided during the process of self-exclusion.

Top Bitcoin Betting Sites