Problem gambling is a significant public health concern. And the harm can extend far more widely than the gambler.

Children are most vulnerable to this harm, which can include psychological distress and negative impacts on family relationships.

Parental gambling is also associated with child welfare concerns – things like neglect, poor nutrition and family violence.

That’s why the findings of our study – the first to report the number of families and children exposed to risky gambling across Australia – are so worrying.

We found that six per cent of Australian parents with dependent children are classified as problem gamblers. In addition, about 10 per cent of all Australian parents had engaged in some level of risky gambling in the previous 12 months at the time of the data collection. And four per cent of Australian families, including almost 200,000 children, are exposed to serious gambling harm.

Our study also found that 60,000 children were exposed to the highest level of parental gambling problems, likely to result in significant harm, while nearly half a million were exposed to gambling at lower risk levels.

Exposure to problem gambling can have drastic, negative repercussions for a child’s education. This can include a lack of money for school materials and extracurricular activities, and lack of time or support for homework in families where children take on parental responsibilities at a young age.

Other well-documented negative impacts include intergenerational transmission of gambling, whereby children pick up patterns of gambling behaviour from their parents.

So how can we protect children from gambling harm?

We need to specifically address child wellbeing in families where gambling is an issue.

We also need to implement a range of primary prevention programs, based on health promotion activities and public health campaigns. Examples include teaching children in school about what parental gambling problems look like, or educating adults about the negative impacts of gambling on children. They can also involve initiatives promoting healthy family dynamics, as well as reducing the stigma around seeking help.

Secondary and tertiary prevention programs should also be put in place. Secondary programs would focus on families in population segments that are more vulnerable to gambling harm, while tertiary programs would target children who already have experienced harm as a result of parental gambling.

Our findings demonstrate a broader need to extend public health approaches to problem gambling, with the development of specific family approaches that may include more targeted treatment and assessment protocols for health and social services. Multi-sector service responses for parental substance use, for example, are well-established in child protection and family welfare practice and policy.

The large number of children exposed to gambling in Australia justifies better public health initiatives to reduce gambling harm. We need to act now. We can’t afford to roll the dice on these kids’ futures.