Gambling harm entails any negative consequences of a person’s own or someone else’s gambling to the wellbeing of an individual, family unit, community or population (Langham et al., 2016). Gambling harms can be experienced by all individuals who gamble but also by non-gambling family members and friends. These are commonly referred to in the gambling literature as affected others (Delfabbro & King, 2017, 2019; Dowling et al., 2021).
Affected others on population level

Internationally, estimates from published general population surveys indicate that 2% to over 20% of the adult population are negatively affected by someone else’s gambling, and can be classified as affected others (Castrén et al., 2021; Dowling, et al., 2021; Lind et al., 2022). A handful of Australian state- and territory-wide general population studies on gambling have specifically asked about the types of negative impacts of someone else’s gambling. In Australia, the most recent past year prevalence estimates for affected others range from 5% to 8% of the adult population of Australian jurisdictions (Acil Allen Consulting et al., 2017; Hing et al., 2022; Paterson et al., 2019; Rockloff et al., 2020; Stevens et al., 2019). Lifetime estimates of being exposed to someone else’s gambling range from 12% in Queensland in which only gambling of immediate family members were considered (Queensland Department of Justice and Attorney-General, 2018) to 47% in NSW in which gambling of any person was considered (Browne et al., 2020). Further research employing larger national samples of affected others recruited from the general population is however required to enhance our understanding of the extent of affected others at the population level.

Gambling harms experienced by affected others

Gambling-related harms that are most likely to be experienced by affected others include financial and psychological distress, and negative impacts on family and relationship functioning (Bellringer et al., 2013, Cowlishaw & Kessler, 2016, Hodgins et al., 2007, Langham et al., 2016). Intimate partners and dependent children are most vulnerable to these harms and they report high levels of relationship dissatisfaction, conflict, reduced trust, poor communication, financial deprivation, and confusion of family roles and responsibilities (Cowlishaw et al., 2016; Dowling et al., 2009; Hodgins et al., 2007; Kalischuk, et al., 2006; Suomi et al., 2022a, 2022b, 2023, 2024a, 2024b). Studies also indicate high rates of family violence in families experiencing gambling harm (Dowling et al., 2014, 2016, 2018; Suomi et al., 2013, 2019).

Who are affected others?

There is little population-level data about the demographic characteristics of affected others. The extant literature demonstrates mixed results in relation to demographics such as sex, age, marital status and education, which is likely explained by the different definitions of affected other status employed in these studies (Dowling et al., 2021).

Most Australian studies have found no significant associations with gender (Hing et al., 2022; Rockloff et al., 2020; Stevens et al., 2019; Woods et al., 2018) and most surveys report that affected others are more likely to be in younger and middle-age groups, rather than in older age groups (Hing, Russell, Browne, et al., 2022; Paterson et al., 2019; Rockloff et al., 2020). Other factors that may predict affected other status are low and very high income (Rockloff et al., 2020) and having never married (Hing et al., 2022).

The 2019 ACT Gambling Survey found that both married and single people are affected by the gambling of others at relatively high rates compared with people reporting other relationship statuses (de facto/in a relationship, separated, divorced or widowed) (Paterson et al., 2019). There is consistent evidence from these Australian surveys that harm resulting from someone else’s gambling is also associated with own gambling participation (Hing et al., 2022; Rockloff et al., 2020). This is the case particularly in relation to electronic gaming machines (EGM) gambling (Stevens et al., 2019), and one’s own risk for problem gambling (Hing et al., 2022; Paterson et al., 2019; Queensland Department of Justice and Attorney-General, 2018; Rockloff et al., 2020).