Indigenous card gambler profiles in north Queensland.

Breen, Helen

Abstract: Card gambling has been engaged in by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in northern parts of Australia for centuries but limited information is available explaining the games and the gamblers. To deepen our understanding of card gambling, this paper uses a public health approach to analyse card gambler profiles in north Queensland. Three typical profiles emerged from the results and have been labelled social, binge and committed gamblers. They have also been identified as being positioned along a public health continuum of gambling from healthy at one end (gambling in low-risk situations) to unhealthy (gambling in high-risk situations) at the opposite end. A model of these gambler profiles explains the gambler's participation, behaviour, motivations and outcomes on the continuum. Potentially, and in consultation with local communities, these findings could help to inform the development of culturally appropriate public health strategies for specific groups of card gamblers.

Introduction

Gambling on games of chance such as cards is a very old pastime and exchange system best understood within the culture in which the gambling takes place. In northern parts of Australia, Indigenous card gambling has been a leisure and resource exchange activity for a very long time (Berndt and Berndt 1946-47; Blainey 1975; Christie et al. 2010; Macknight 1976). However, apart from mostly ethnographies of single, remote communities (Altman 1985; Goodale 1987; Martin, D 1993; Phillips 2003), Indigenous card gambling has attracted little research attention. There is very limited information about who typically participates in card gambling, their gambling behaviours and motivations, and the consequences experienced by gamblers and others. To make a contribution to knowledge on this topic, the aim of this paper is to identify and explain selected aspects of Indigenous Australian card gambling by taking a public health approach. Specifically, the purpose is to explore and analyse card gambling participation and outcomes in several locations in north Queensland.

This paper first reviews Indigenous Australian card gambling literature and a public health model useful for investigating gambling. It is followed by a detailed description of the research methods and analysis used in this research. The results are presented and themes summarised in a table. The results are analysed and discussed concurrently. The paper ends with conclusions and implications.

Indigenous card gambling background

'Some Aboriginal groups of northern Australia gambled at cards at the first time of contact with Europeans, a practice introduced by Asian traders' (Binde 2005:6).

The widely held view that gambling was introduced into Australia by British colonists in the late 1770s is in contest. In fact, there was long and repeated contact in the north between Indigenous Australians, Melanesians and Asian traders and fishermen, especially those from Macassar in south Sulawesi (Christie et al. 2010; Macknight 1976). Based on shipping records and sea captains' letters, from at least the 1670s, the Macassans sailed annually to settle in northern Australia during monsoon season and returned home in the dry. While here, they gathered trepang (edible sea slugs) for Chinese markets and traded with local Indigenous Australians (Macknight 1976). Some Indigenous Australians visited Macassar (Harney 1969) and returned with new ideas, carvings, songs and even myths (Blainey 1975). One introduced activity was card games and gambling on cards. Cards were played with Indigenous Australians for gain, where the winnings were used to pay for resources and workers (Macknight 1976). Cards were also played for recreation (Berndt and Berndt 1987). Sociability was as important as commodity exchanges. The Macassan enterprise ended in 1907 when the South Australian Government (then with legal control of the Northern Territory) increased taxes and fees for trepang collection (Rolls 1992). As a consequence, this flourishing international trade, which was carried on for hundreds of years, closed down. Nevertheless, some practices, including card games and gambling, remained with northern Indigenous groups.

Colonisation brought settlement of land by Europeans and cataclysmic change for Indigenous Australians. In the north, colonisation was later than in the south-east but Indigenous people suffered the same (Broome 2001). Traditional hunting, food gathering and housing became harder to access. With dispossession, Indigenous Australians needed money to live but lacked official status for paid work, health care and housing (Broome 2001). Under state protection acts, Indigenous people needed permission to earn and spend money (Haebich 1988). Gambling became 'the socially acceptable means of acquiring the resources necessary for living. The card ring became institutionalized' (Foote 1996:185).

Although Tonkinson (1974) suggests that card gambling displaced Indigenous ceremony and ritual as a community activity in Central Australia, for the Wik people at Aurukun on Western Cape York, David Martin (1993) found cards held cultural meanings involving personal identity, autonomy and social relatedness. Similarly, in Arnhem Land for the Gunwinggu people, card gambling was reported to contribute to shared social meanings at Momega outstation (Altman 1985). On Melville Island, while card gambling was viewed by Tiwi people as work, it also met some of their social needs in achieving self-identity (Goodale 1987). Gambling was a general means of redistributing money within some Kimberley communities (Hunter 1993). Thus, card games and gambling adapted and evolved depending on the situation. From her childhood, Lockyer (1999) recollects card games being played for recreation, with and without money. She describes tea drinking, smoking, children playing, babies being fed, constant talk, gossip, teasing and fun. Social, collective and exchange processes were woven into card games. Other card game recollections can be found in biographies and autobiographies (see, for example, Dodd and Vaughan 1985; Gnibi Langford 1994; Grant 2002; Hagan 2005; Keefe 2003; Morgan 1989; Randall 2003). Card games form a significant part of Indigenous communities' gambling repertoire (CIRCA 2011).

Card gambling has both positive and negative outcomes. Positive outcomes include social interaction (AHMRC 2007), the opportunity to win money and to fundraise (McDonald and Wombo 2006), building numeracy skills (Baturo and Cooper 2007), promoting some resource redistribution (Christie and Greatorex 2009) and access to credit (Hunter and Spargo 1988; Phillips 2003). Protective factors reported to be associated with card gambling include having role models, relatedness (family kin group and cultural support) and resilience (learning from others, individual resilience and family support to curtail gambling) (Breen 2012).

Negative outcomes from card gambling have been reported as higher anxiety scores, compromised nutrition and impaired parenting for gamblers (Hunter and Spargo 1988), psychological pressure for sharing resources (Hunter 1993) and addiction (Christie and Greatorex 2009). Further negative outcomes include some exploitation of women by men seeking money (McKnight 2002), an outflow of family money (AHMRC 2007), social dysfunction and child neglect (McDonald and Wombo 2006; Wild and Anderson 2007), reduced community development through demand sharing and an inability to save (Hunter and Spargo 1988) and creating a diversion from cultural activities (Berndt and Berndt 1946-47). Some negative generational outcomes associated with card gambling include a heightened likelihood of future gambling and school absenteeism (Breen 2012). Identifying typical card gambling participation, behaviour and motivations should expand current understanding about gambling outcomes. A broader understanding is important for developing culturally appropriate public health gambling services and resources to assist people in controlling their gambling and reducing negative outcomes (CIRCA 2011).

The main purpose of adopting a public health approach to health care management is to improve a population's health status (WHO 1986). When gambling is treated as a population concern, it becomes a public health issue (CIRCA 2011; Productivity Commission 2010). As such, all health experiences and influential environments should be considered when assisting gamblers maintain a balanced lifestyle and minimise risks of harm (Productivity Commission 2010). Thus, a public health investigation analyses influences and assists gamblers to find ways of moving from less healthy or less controlled gambling to healthier or more controlled gambling (Shaffer and Korn 2002). Using a continuum of gambling behaviours, Korn and Shaffer (1999) describe healthy gambling as a pleasurable experience in a low risk situation where people know the odds of winning and spend reasonable amounts of money. Unhealthy gambling, at the other end of the continuum, leads to people experiencing gambling-related problems. The Productivity Commission (2010) reported that gambling problems can be seen on a spectrum of increasing severity, from no risk gambling to a heightened risk of gambling-related problems and then gambling with significant risk, with accompanying and increasing harmful outcomes (Productivity Commission 2010).

Generally, higher levels of at-risk and problem gambling have been reported for Indigenous Australians. Using responses from one question about gambling problems in the Negative Life Event Scale, and data from the 2003-04 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey and the 2006 General Social Survey, Stevens and Young (2009) reported a national problem gambling rate of 13.5% for Indigenous Australians, ranging from 8.3% to 24.5% for different jurisdictions. Using different methods, the Productivity Commission (2010) estimated that 0.5% to 1.0% of people nationally suffered significant gambling problems and 1.4% to 2.1% experienced moderate gambling risks. Although not directly comparable, wide differences in available gambling prevalence data indicate the need for research into Indigenous gambler behavioural characteristics to attempt to identify and reduce harms associated with problematic gambling.

Targeted public health strategies can be developed for a range of different gambler groups. One target group includes those negatively affected by gambling but not requiring assistance (primary prevention). A second group comprises those at risk of developing gambling problems in the future (secondary prevention). A third group is made up of those who need counselling or treatment for their gambling problems (tertiary intervention) (Korn and Shaffer 1999). Using the continuum model opens the way to investigate influences that affect gambling by each group.

Methods

The research design, setting, sample, interviews and analysis will now be explained. A qualitative research design, considered a culturally sensitive and sharing method by Karen Martin (2003, 2008), was used to build relationships and goodwill in this research. Relationships form the basis of Indigenous philosophies and life (Atkinson 2002). Respectful co-operative qualitative research is especially appropriate for gaining in-depth understandings. It focuses on how people interpret and analyse their own situations to give meaning to their lives (Denzin and Lincoln 2008). Qualitative research values individual perspectives and experiences. Thus, this investigation sat within an interpretive paradigm using a social constructivist approach (Guba and Lincoln 1989). Social constructions were built by asking Indigenous Australians about their experiences and perceptions of card gambling in north Queensland.

Based on national statements (NHMRC 2007), Indigenous guidelines (AIATSIS 2002, 2011) and health-related Indigenous research guidelines (NHMRC 2003), ethics approval was gained from the researchers' University Human Research Ethics Committee. At the same time permission was granted by Indigenous Elders and traditional owners in each location for a non-Indigenous researcher to conduct this project. Adhering to protocols was important for culturally safe research conduct (Rigney 1997). Adherence to ethical spirit and integrity (Davis and Holcombe 2010) facilitated the processes of engagement.

In Queensland the Indigenous population (3.6%) is high compared with 2.5% of the national population (ABS 2006). Across the state, three north Queensland research sites were chosen, the Gulf, Eyre and Rainforest regions of Aboriginal Australia (ABS 2006; Horton 1996). These settings included a sparsely populated northern remote area with few gambling opportunities and unreliable communications; a western regional mining town with most forms of gambling except for casinos; and a populous city on the eastern seaboard with all forms of gambling available.

In order to find people with in-depth gambling information, groups thought to he knowledgeable about Indigenous gambling were contacted. Personal contacts and local telephone books were used to lead to the selection of information-rich cases (Patton 1990). Snowball sampling was used to contact potential participants. This process continued until saturation was reached and no new nominations were made. Repeat visits were made to each region. Contact was maintained between and after visits.

The sample included 60 Indigenous Australians (35 women and 25 men), with 13 refusals. There were 35 people from the Rainforest region, 18 from the Eyre and 7 from the Gulf regions. All participants were adults aged over 18 years. Two personal questions were asked, one about roles in the community and one about current gambling status. Some participants reported having multiple roles, such as being a member of a justice group, a representative of a community agency and an Elder, while others were simply community members. All had been gamblers but some were non-gamblers now. Two people reported they had received help for gambling problems. Results could not be generalised as this was a purposive, self-selected sample.

All interviews were held with individuals face to face. They were conducted at mutually suitable places and times. The research was explained and people were free to withdraw at any stage. Appropriate consent forms were explained and signed. Set questions were asked about gambling participation, behaviours, motivations and outcomes. To ensure responsive interviews, neither the exact wording nor the order of questions was pre-determined. Questions became more open-ended and responses more considered as interviews progressed. On local advice, digital recordings were not made; instead, field notes were written during the interview. These were read back immediately for both parties to amend or approve. Printed transcripts were later sent to participants. Although Christie et al. (2010) state that Yol0u people insist that they be identified as the source of their comments, for these research participants, personal gambling information was regarded as confidential and sensitive. Despite arguments by Christie et al. (2010) and Holcombe (2010), most people desired anonymity, so codes replaced names.

The interview data were analysed using thematic analysis, a method for identifying, analysing and reporting themes by organising and describing the data set in detail and by interpreting various aspects of the research topic (Braun and Clarke 2006). Using sentences and paragraphs, data were coded manually into themes. Multiple codes were used to ensure that meaning was not lost. The coding was repeated using a software program, NVivo V8 (QSR International 2008). This was effective in handling data volume and ensured that all themes were included. Themes were sifted, reviewed and drawn together to find results. Thematic analysis protects anonymity as all results are grouped and presented by themes rather than by individual narrative or case analyses.

Results

A range of key themes emerged from participants' responses, which explained card gambling participation, gambling behaviour, motivations and consequences. The themes and their sub-themes, explained below, are:

* Theme one: card gambling participation--explanations of historic and cultural influences, game preferences and players

* Theme two: card gambling behaviour--descriptions of gambling behaviour, frequency, duration and expenditure

* Theme three: motivations for card gambling --explanations including winning, socialising, passing time, escape and distraction

* Theme four: card gambling consequences--descriptions of positive and negative outcomes.

Theme one: card gambling participation

This theme includes historical and cultural influences, game preferences, player characteristics, proportions of players and access to card gambling. Explaining historical and cultural influences, four women shared their recollections about socialising, storytelling, reciprocity, kinship and community networks linked to cards and gambling. These women felt that card gambling was linked to their long-held sense of kinship and community but perceived a trend of winning emerging as a modern replacement. One explained (BfI054):

 In the old days it was all about socialising and
 interacting within families. It's a very Murri
 thing to do, time to talk. Gets people out
 of their house and away from boredom for
 a while ... Small amounts of money might be
 wagered, if indeed any money was wagered at
 all, [now] mini-casino card playing for high
 stakes.

Popular games were cut'em, kuunkan and kabu, in that order. About half the research participants said that Indigenous cards were preferred over commercial card games. Cut'em, also called katan or cut, was described as a game of chance. Both women and men played cut'em, a fast game of variable stakes. Up to 50 people could play in one game, including a banker. When large pools of money were at stake, these games became loud and animated.

In contrast, kuunkan, also called kuncan, is a game of skill. It appeared as a variation of the game gin rummy. Women tended to play kuunkan in slow daytime games. However, women and men played it together at night and at weekends in fast, high-stakes games. Players formed a set of cards in one suit. A skilled player counted and discarded high cards early. Some might enter a game based on the value of the pool. While about four to six players actually played cards, the game was extended by side bets around the card ring.

Kabu, also known as karbu, cuboo and two-three card game, is a game of chance played by women and men. It was a variable-speed game with variable stakes. Players were dealt three cards and added cards to get the number nine or multiples of nine to win. Kabu was both a low and high stakes game. Large amounts of money were won when 12 players gambled using large stakes.

When asked 'who usually gambles on cards?' the strongest response from the majority of people was that women gamble. Evidence of this was seen in responses from every research location: 'It is women who mostly gamble' (AmI020, BfI049), and 'Women are the biggest gamblers playing cards' (CmNI028). Some participants reported that women with strong religious beliefs did not gamble, while for others card gambling was a prominent activity. In some families generations of women gamble together; grandmothers, mothers and daughters. Some men gambled on cards, but 'It's a predominantly female pastime or domain' (AmI083).

Occasionally, however, everyone gambled on cards. About half the research participants in all locations observed that, while gambling was usually an adult activity, in some places almost everyone, old and young, gambled on cards. Card gambling was often intergenerational and trans-generational, across several generations. Its popularity was often linked to family gatherings and the arrival of visitors. Visitors from other regions often went to the card game to find people and sometimes a place to stay. Explaining the significance of the card game as a meeting place, one man explained, 'used to be big card schools on the site of the park ... If anyone came into--to find someone or just wanted to look for someone they would usually go there first' (AmI030). While card gambling provided social opportunities, it had practical outcomes as well.

Estimating the proportion of people who gambled on cards, the research participants reported a range between 25% and 65%. One person observed, '25 to 30% of adults ... are regular card gamblers, 50 to 60% are periodic card gamblers, about two thirds of adults gamble. A few don't gamble at all. These are the Uniting Church mob and some older folk who are housebound' (CfI041). Thus, card gambling was reported as an occasional pastime for the majority of adults.

In terms of access to card gambling, two types, physical and social access, were described by participants. Physical access includes convenience, proximity, availability and opportunities to gamble, while social access includes appeal, ease of use and acceptance (Productivity Commission 1999). Research participants described card gambling as being physically available in private and public spaces, with some location differences. In the city and regional town, about one-third of research participants reported that, over time, card gambling had been forced into homes. The use of the legal move-on power was behind the shift from public to private sites. For the remote location about one-third of the research participants described card gambling locations as 'a backyard, under a tree, in a carport' (BfI049). Children were sometimes seen playing about outside while their parents, mostly mothers, played cards.

Focusing on social access and processes within card games, one person explained that gamblers 'play in the homes or on the veranda where they socialise ... but everyone knows they are there. To find people to get important documents signed ... we go to the card game to find that person. They can be important people in this community or ordinary community members' (CfI094). Entrepreneurial people had access for business purposes. Some prepared meals and drinks to sell to card players. Access appeared to be democratic. Card gambling circles had wider social and economic utility than just gambling.

Theme two: card gambling behaviour

This theme includes behavioural characteristics of card gamblers, including their gambling frequency, duration and expenditure. For frequency, gambling peaks were reported by about half the participants as occurring on payday in the three research locations. Payday gambling was explained as 'Peaks on pension or payday, 20 or so play in a ring but only about five on a slack day just before payday' (AfI030). Depending on the frequency of payday, more card gambling occurred when people had funds. One man described a typical card gambling pattern as 'always later in the week Wednesday, Thursday or Friday nights. People on full employment get paid generally on Thursdays, people on pensions get paid on Wednesday every second week' (AmI106). Access to money in pay week produced noticeable peaks in card gambling activities.

The duration of card gambling was described in each research location as either short or long sessions. Sessions were long if winning but short if losing: 'Games can go for six hours to three days in remote areas depending on what money is floating around. If the whole pot goes early then it's a short game' (AmI083). About one-third of the research participants reported shorter sessions as about three hours. One person (AmI107) described this typical pattern:

 The money comes in about 11am and most
 people go off and get their kids' things that
 they need first. Then at about 1pm they will
 start gambling. If they have a win they will
 go home soon after that. They will have
 cleaned 'em up and maybe won a few thousand
 dollars.

Family care appeared to dictate shorter sessions, as gambling usually ended when school finished. Within certain family and social limits, some used the card ring for discussion and consultation plus the opportunity to win money. Card games regulation was explained as 'They might set time limits for stopping, for meals and breaks and for starting again ... family card groups, mostly tea drinkers who use cards as a social time to get together to discuss family politics to talk over community matters and get several opinions on issues and problems' (AfI004).

In contrast, longer low-stakes card gambling sessions were played predominantly by women. These sessions included 'betting regularly and for long periods but not for big pots' (AmI034). Women might play for 12 hours but stop to prepare and consume food and drink and care for children. Players could become engrossed in cards and play all day or all night. Social engagement in card games for long periods appeared to be a regulated collective activity for these women.

Altogether different were longer high-stakes card gambling sessions held at night and played by men and women. They regularly gambled to win money. Longer high-stakes sessions were explained thus: 'Gambling school could start about 4pm as pay is given out about 3.30pm and continues till about 2 or 3am on Wednesday and Thursday nights, depending on whether they are high roller or not, high rollers are experienced big gamblers' (AmI104). Some people come and go, but others stay till the end of the game. A losing gambler might wait 'until someone feels sorry for them and throws them some "chop", something to get started again ... about 10-12 might sit on the blanket at one time' (AmI107). These longer card games usually involved some sharing of money to keep the games alive. Having a sufficient number of players was vital for cards and, besides, the loser today might be the winner tomorrow. Thus tolerance was often shown to losers.

Some organised weekend card games were said to be held every two or three months in regional towns and remote locations by approximately one-quarter of the research participants. A sporadic high-expenditure card gambling pattern called 'binge gambling' (BfI054, AmI037) was apparent to some. Binge gamblers were seen as people who gambled intensively in irregular bouts over a short time and then ceased gambling till the next event. Binge gambling was conducted under continuous conditions. Gamblers could win large amounts of money, estimated as between $400 and $5000, in one night. No sharing or recycling of winnings occurs as the winner takes all. An entry stake of about $100 was charged. Excitement and sociability were associated with these inter-community games. Describing these sessions, a neighbour explained, 'There is plenty of excitement, rowdy, some brawls. Older kids watch younger kids. Keep inside the yard. Games can last three or four days' (BfI047).

For card gambling expenditure, two obvious patterns were explained as lower and higher range spending, from $5 to $500. Lower range expenditure on card gambling, reported by the majority of research participants, was estimated at $5 to $20. It was described as 'social ... a long-standing activity in many Indigenous households' (AfI004). Sometimes card players did not gamble; they just played cards and talked. Most gamblers set affordable spending limits, having met their commitments first. In the remote location about 10% of participants said that small winnings were redistributed or 'recycled' (CfI051) throughout their social group or community. Sometimes a portion of the game was set aside for charity, such as to help an aunty pay a large telephone bill, particularly if she had a lot of relatives staying with her. Lower expenditure involved discretionary or budgeted funds, which were sometimes recycled in remote locations.

Switching to higher range card gambling expenditure, this was reported as up to $500 per session by approximately half the research participants and 'sometimes $100 for each bet' (AmI104). Some high-expenditure card gambling was identified by nearly one-quarter of the research participants in regional and remote locations as 'mini-casino gambling' (AfI018). This gambling was intense and continuous, somewhat similar to casino gambling, where the gamblers were said to 'never leave their money on the mat' (CfI094), but where winnings might be $10 000 to $15 000. One woman who lived near a house hosting mini-casino-style card games called her street 'Casino Street' (BfI047). Losers could leave the game with debts. Some winners returned home with their winnings and some took them to other card gambling sites, while others went into commercial venues to try their luck.

Some entrepreneur-organised weekend card gambling was mentioned by approximately one-quarter of the research participants. They could be three-day events where a matriarch or patriarch organised and controlled the game in his or her house. One woman explained: 'serious gambling group has players from other locations and communities joining in, money chasers, big dollars on offer ... big stakes card games. An experienced person sets up a site as a card house. They take a percentage out of the game to pay ... overheads ... for themselves. It is very competitive, individualist play' (AfI004). With large sums of money at stake, some winners were invited to continue gambling elsewhere, ensuring returns for the entrepreneur.

Theme three: motivations for card gambling

Important card gambling motivations were reported to be to win and to socialise (both equally important) by about three-quarters of research participants. To pass the time was next in importance, mentioned by about half the participants. This was followed by the joint motivations of escape and distraction supported by about 15% of the participants.

The opportunity to win money at cards was important in all research locations. The theme of gambling to win comprised sub-themes: the opportunity to make purchases, to reciprocate past debts, to be seen as lucky and for excitement. Many people described card gambling as being motivated by winning to make money and by hoping to remove economic barriers and raise their living standards. This was explained as 'in a barren economic landscape this is one opportunity to get ahead' (AmI031). Some people took gambling risks to fulfil their aspirations for a better life, especially those in difficult economic and social circumstances.

Winnings helped raise funds for purchases or repayments. A win at cards might help buy cigarettes, alcohol or other purchases. A win could produce enough money for reciprocation and to repay loans and favours. Being seen as lucky meant that some gamblers were asked to play cards for others. A person who regularly won at cards may do this 'to maintain their status as a winner or lucky person' (AmI107). A lucky aunty once gave one participant's mother about $200 to $300 after a big card win. Providing benefits enhanced the gambler's self-esteem and raised obligations for the receiver. Gambling provided excitement. The thrill that accompanied wins was perceived as 'the rush of adrenaline' (CfI041).

Equally important in all three research locations was gambling to socialise. Socialising comprised several sub-themes: social interaction, to disseminate information and as a collective activity. Meeting up with family, relatives and friends at a gathering where cards are played was a normal part of life for some. Card gambling was an opportunity for a 'show and tell session' (CfI051) and for social processes to occur, especially if people had not seen each other for a while. Communication was integral to card gambling. In remote areas the card ring was a key information-sharing network. Two research participants used the card ring for communication: 'Get information in and about the community, share information. Justice groups target gamblers, gives them specific information and you know it will disseminate through their groups' (CfI051) and 'The Justice group is able to disseminate information through the card rings telling one or two players something important and they will tell the rest' (CfI041). For some, card gambling was perceived as being connected to a shared Indigenous collective activity. One person remarked that it might have started as 'Social, this then becomes the culture' (AfI085). Connecting, communicating and sharing were important elements of social card gambling.

Gambling on cards to pass the time and reduce boredom was reported by about one-third of the research participants. Under-employment and unemployment contributed to gambling activities when people had plenty of time and boredom was high. In the remote location, several people emphasised a lack of alternative recreation. A participant noted that 'There is little choice in recreation, no transport, no other activity. No continuous activities happen on a regular basis. This is especially the case for [people] over 18 years' (CfI053). Card gambling was recreation for the elderly who were unable to fish or undertake traditional physical activities.

Card gambling was also said to provide an escape from crises according to about 10% of the research participants. These motivations were described as solace for dealing with problems, including mental health crises. One person said that, with alcohol restrictions, 'gambling has replaced alcohol as relief ... [for people] trapped in a cycle of hopelessness and despair' (BfI054). However, gambling to escape appeared to create additional problems such as addiction. As an escape, card gambling provided some short-term relief from negative life issues.

Theme four: card gambling consequences

The research participants identified positive and negative card gambling consequences. Positive consequences included social and cultural reassurance, enhanced collective culture and reduced alcohol consumption. On the contrary, negative consequences were said to be financial hardship, neglect of children, violence and demands for sharing by the gambler.

As positive consequences, card games provided the opportunity for social and cultural assurance. Going to a commercial gaming venue could be a daunting experience because of cultural, social and physical barriers. However, card games were comfortable, being settings where dress codes and appearances did not apply. People simply enjoyed the games, gossip and companionship: 'Card games are one of the few places to find Indigenous friends' (BfI044).

Culturally, card games such as cut'em, kuunkan and kabu were seen as being exclusively owned, organised and played by Indigenous Australians. Some participants felt that these card games belonged to them and were, in a cultural sense, private games. Card gambling was also appreciated for camaraderie, a recreational activity incorporating acceptance and inclusiveness. One woman described a sense of cultural reassurance as ownership, where 'Gambling is seen as the one thing they haven't taken away, taken away kids, grog etc.' (AfI103). The feeling of control over card gambling was contrasted against a lack of control over other matters.

Extended family and community collective strength was apparent when families shared their winnings: 'If one person gets it, the extended family will share it, up to 20 people' (CfI053). Sharing resources is integral for a collective culture. Recycling card gambling winnings testified to the depth and breadth of belonging to a family and a community. Some card gambling raised funds for community concerns. A reflection on sharing was the observation that 'Aboriginal way, to share food, share house, share resources widely' (CfI052).

Alcohol consumption was usually not tolerated at the card ring according to several participants. Card gambling required concentration and focus without disruptions by alcohol-fuelled players. In the remote location this was serious: 'Gamblers are non-drinkers. Alcohol drinkers are not gamblers' (CfI041). Some reformed drinkers were observed to substitute gambling for drinking. People in card gambling rings often regulated the level of alcohol being consumed in its vicinity.

In contrast, negative consequences arising from card gambling were said to be financial hardship, neglect of children, violence and demands for sharing by the gambler. Card gamblers endured financial hardship if they spent more than they could afford. In one case, both husband and wife were reported to occasionally spend two entire wages on card gambling, resulting in major financial difficulties. Others sought loans, which were not always repaid. One woman who no longer gambled on cards described her experience: 'If I won, people would ask me for a loan. I'd give it to them and then they wouldn't pay it back. I lost too much time chasing up loans' (BfI057). Card gambling losses resulted in a drain of resources, especially when chasing losses had a higher priority than meeting financial commitments. Some gamblers focused on their individual needs and gambled continuously and this had ripple effects for others, including children.

Neglect of children due to card gambling was reported by participants to include children staying up late, losing sleep, missing school, being hungry, eating large quantities of take-away food and being potentially vulnerable to abuse through a lack of adequate supervision. A child support worker said that, in his experience, 'Children are present at the game, given $100 to get the minivan into town to get food. Often get take-away food, not good for nutrition. Children neglected and abuse problems can arise' (BmI089). Highlighting the importance of children's issues, participants emphasised their physical safety, emotional welfare and mental health state. One possible solution proposed by a research participant was, 'At some card games it's Centrelink money on the table. The government needs to protect kids from adults who gamble excessively by taking rations money from their payments' (BfI057). Children were seen to be most affected by adult gambling losses.

Violence--generally male violence against women--was reported by several research participants to result from women's card gambling. Explaining the effect of some gambling and other addictions as violence, one person said, 'alcohol, gambling, domestic violence, all common in the risk takers' (AmI029). Card gambling losses held a double jeopardy for women when violence followed. Risk-takers were both perpetrators and victims of violence.

Occasionally, loan demands were made by gamblers for extra gambling funds. Talking about his/her own family, one person said that while most people set money limits, some don't because they demand and expect loans from family and kin. Explaining this delicate cultural and financial balance, one person (CfI053) observed:

 Regular gamblers ... put big money in the
 centre, if not they borrow from a family
 member. Some family members give it and
 some are reluctant to give. Grandmothers
 don't like to give, it's the only little bit they
 have. Each person makes a judgment on who
 it is, who wants to borrow.

Pressure to care for family members was said to worry the elderly. Cultural reciprocity meant that people usually helped others if they asked for assistance.

Demand sharing was also called humbugging: 'Humbug payment is money given to relatives who have no pensions, no ... jobs, no family allowance payments ...' "No" is not an option for these relatives given their kinship obligations', said one participant (AmI031). Demand sharing was perceived to lead to a cycle of dependency for givers, receivers, their families and their communities. Describing negative outcomes of humbugging in a community close to a large mine, one person (AfI030) reported:

 If Indigenous mine workers go home to their
 local community, they suffer from being
 pestered by their relatives for money and
 goods. For some it all gets too much so they
 catch the [free corporate] jet into--to get
 away from the harassment. However the
 family on the community loses its father, a
 wife loses a husband. In--they have some
 peace and meet their friends, other miners, to
 relax. Four communities affected here.

For some, the burden of gambling losses was borne by others as gambling habits were reinforced.

Analysis and discussion

Drawing together these results, several Indigenous card gambler profiles can be seen emerging. Two strong yet contrasting profiles have been labelled social and committed gamblers. A further distinctive but discrete profile has been labelled a binge gambler.

The first gambler profile, labelled social card gamblers here, can be seen in those who gamble to socialise, pass the time and win occasionally. These gamblers, mostly women, play with low stakes (usually less than $25), in leisurely sessions with familiar groups. While gambling they share news, seek views and discuss community matters. These findings support Hunter and Spargo (1988) and Phillips (2003), with women being more constant gamblers. Socialising at cards was endorsed by Dodd and Vaughan (1985:47), where everyone gathered to 'talk and get the latest gossip'. Similarly, for McDonald and Wombo (2006), card gambling provided social interaction, leisure and sporadic financial benefits. Children still play around the outside of card games as they did earlier (Berndt and Berndt 1987; Goodale 1987; Keefe 2003; Lockyer 1999). Winners were expected to play until the end of the game so losers had an opportunity to win something back. Some redistribution of winnings occurred over a long time when members of the group remained constant. Although redistribution is disputed by Stevens and Young (2009), in this research some redistribution of winnings was evident, supporting previous findings (Altman 1985; Christie and Greatorex 2009).

The group influence of card gambling was strong and appeared to be informally regulated by social and collective norms. Social card gambling normally included consideration for others, having refreshment breaks and caring for children. At a functional level, card gambling here seems to facilitate the social processes of communication and consultation and to underpin some community decision making. Collective norms such as these have always been part of Indigenous Australian culture. That they are revealed here should be no surprise to Indigenous Australians but they appear not to have been published in academic literature before.

Gambling consequences for social card gamblers included comfort in undertaking an activity that belonged solely and culturally to Indigenous Australians. Social card gambling appeared to enhance collective networks and relationships, as found earlier by Altman (1985) and David Martin (1993). However, the self-regulation and group regulation processes of maintaining control over gambling expenditure, limiting session length, not tolerating alcohol use and protective care giving of children demonstrate some of the strengths of collective culture in action, allowing people to enjoy and sustain their card gambling.

One implication from these findings for public health policy and decision makers is to see this

group as a primary prevention target. Primary prevention strategies aimed at social gambler groups might include culturally appropriate messages to support and extend their control over gambling while maintaining community recreational benefits. If encouraged, this group is one that could disseminate these messages to ensure that all community members have the opportunity to hear and learn about responsible gambling practices.

In contrast, the second gambler type, labelled a committed gambler here, appears to gamble to win money. These gamblers play with high stakes (more than $25), in long intensive sessions, showing high gambling involvement. Availability of card games in some locations, as Phillips (2003:58) noted, was 'always there'. Winners kept their winnings, usually money but sometimes valuable assets. Earlier, Berndt and Berndt (1946-47:248) called card games 'insidious' because players became so immersed that they excluded other activities. However, they did acknowledge, as did Goodale (1987), that card gambling was a means of making money and was perceived as a form of work.

Committed gambling yielded some positive outcomes when large amounts of money were won but negative consequences were more long lasting. Financial difficulty, the most problematic outcome, was commonly linked to chasing losses, often with borrowed money. Credit purchase problems and lack of money for food as a result of card gambling were found to contribute to poverty and disadvantage (AHMRC 2007; Hunter and Spargo 1988; McDonald and Wombo 2006). Ripple effects of gambling losses were described by Phillips (2003) as being similar to passive smoking affecting those closest to the gambler first (his or her family) and then those around the gambler (community members). Similar effects were reported in this research. Children on the edge of card games were sometimes overlooked due to the high level of intense activity and game length, as found by Wild and Anderson (2007). Ignoring children during card games was raised by Hunter (1993), McDonald and Wombo (2006) and Phillips (2003) as neglect of their physical, emotional and psychological welfare. Risks to children were intensified by any lack of supervision.

Demand sharing put 'relentless pressure' on people to provide money or resources to gamblers (Martin, D 1993:106) and contributed to male anxiety levels (Hunter 1993). In this research a distinctive feature of Indigenous Australian collective culture, reciprocity, seemed to be overturned by some gamblers to meet their individual needs. Vulnerable groups such as the elderly, who may have a small but reliable income, appear to be exploited by some gamblers demanding funds based on traditional and kin obligations. Such action detracts from family and community cohesion and reduces traditional Indigenous values of sharing and caring for others. Demand sharing for gambling purposes appears to damage long-held Indigenous Australian principles of reciprocity.

From a public health perspective, committed gamblers could benefit from tertiary prevention strategies such as culturally appropriate assistance from health workers or treatment from gambling counsellors. Their families and community groups may also be helped with primary prevention strategies, such as ways to say 'no' respectfully to demands for funds, developed in consultation with Elders and traditional advisers.

A third card gambler profile emerging from this study was labelled an occasional binge card gambler. Binge card gamblers were seen as a combination of social and committed card gamblers. They usually gambled as social gamblers (smaller stakes, slower games), but occasionally had a gambling binge or bout and then gambled like committed gamblers (higher stakes, faster games). Two types of card gambling have been recognised by Altman (1985:56), who saw card gambling as a 'leisure activity' involving small stakes and as a 'business activity' using larger stakes. However, it was not clear if the same or different people engaged in both types of gambling. Similarly, Goodale (1987:7) recognised two gambling modes, one considered to be 'work' and another that was more relaxed, 'fun' and 'family'. Goodale (1987) identified the same people playing for both work and leisure while playing the same card game. However, the style and mood of the games changed distinctly from fun to intensely focused games when played for work.

Binge gambling appeared to be connected to social events. Stevens and Young (2009) found that people who attended events were more likely to experience or know people experiencing gambling problems and speculated that this was because they had more opportunity to gamble. However, in this study binge gambling provided gamblers with excitement, a distraction and temporary escape from problems. Those who attended social events often had an opportunity to gamble, but not all people who attended special events were binge gamblers. Further, any gambling problems they experienced were likely to fluctuate. Public health secondary prevention strategies such as early intervention may be appropriate to reduce the risk of gambling escalation. Community group regulation of gambling, seen in social gambling, could be usefully transferred to this group.

In summary, these three card gambling profiles can be seen as a range of healthy to unhealthy gambling behaviour and displayed on a continuum of gambling (Figure 1) (Korn and Shaffer 1999). The social card gambler is positioned at one end of the continuum (the healthy end), while the committed card gambler is positioned at the opposite end (the unhealthy end). Binge card gamblers are positioned in the middle because they shift from social to committed gambling depending on their varying motivations, behaviours and opportunities.

The continuum of card gambler profiles represents a model of gambler profiles including their participation, behaviours, motivations and outcomes, moving from healthy gambling or gambling in low-risk situations through increasing levels of gambling to unhealthy gambling or gambling in high-risk situations (Korn and Shaffer 1999:330; Productivity Commission 2010). Gambling outcomes vary from recreational to harmful. This model is a simple representation of a culturally complex and evolving phenomenon. Although limited by a single interpretation, this model is based genuinely on the research participants' responses. It provides us with a better understanding of card gambling processes and outcomes, moving beyond words to a more considered and theoretical analysis of the qualitative data (Creswell 2003).

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

For limitations, a purposeful sampling technique was used to identify and interview Indigenous Australian research participants in north Queensland about gambling. Different interpretations may have been drawn if the interviews were conducted with other Indigenous Australians and by another researcher. The geographic and demographic contexts in which the research was undertaken meant that generalisability could not be claimed even though these findings may have relevance for different groups of Indigenous gamblers in different locations. As a non-Indigenous Australian, conducting research with Indigenous Australians is limited by different life experiences and opportunities. In trying to produce a truthful account of how gambling has affected people's lives, deep insights have been created of how the world feels from an Indigenous Australian view but this reality may not be captured adequately in words.

Conclusions and implications

These research findings indicate that some aspects of Indigenous Australian card gambling are closely bound to culture. The social card gambler profile highlights the collective nature of traditional culture, where socialising, consultation, care for others, self-regulation, and group regulation of behaviour and resources are highly valued. This typical profile supports and reinforces Indigenous culture by having a positive attitude for the welfare of others, regulating behaviour for the common good and being considerate about the use of resources. However, aspects of the committed card gambler profile, such as demand sharing for gambling funds and long absences from family and children while gambling, are quite the opposite. Here, some collective elements of traditional culture have been turned into individual pursuits dictated by the need to continue gambling. The cost of following these individual pursuits appears to cause damage to the tradition of cultural reciprocity and increase health and welfare risks for the gambler and the gambler's family and community.

Identifying gambler profiles such as these is valuable because they provide an explanation of a variety of contemporary views about Indigenous card gambling and gamblers. This variety reveals that Indigenous card gambling is not homogeneous, as was implied in past research. Understanding distinctive differences between gambler profiles has potentially important public health implications, which may lead to an in-depth understanding of the development of gambling-related problems among Indigenous card gamblers. A further implication is that culturally effective public health strategies may be created from consideration and use of this information.

This model of gambler profiles separates the profiles on the basis of the healthy and unhealthy gambling at about the middle of the continuum. However, the separation into gambler profiles is not fixed, with boundaries between them hazy and with change occurring gradually. Potentially many more gambler profiles could be found in these hazy areas. Thus the model is flexible. The gambler profiles are subject to variable cultural, social, political, economic and environmental influences. Although it is not representative of all Indigenous gamblers, this abstract model of gambler profiles can be adapted to analyse different groups of Indigenous gamblers and for more general use in gambling research.

Acknowledgment

The author acknowledges and thanks the research participants from north Queensland for their generosity of spirit and co-operation.

REFERENCES

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) 2006 Population Distribution: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, 2006, ABS, Canberra (Cat. no. 4705.0).

AHMRC (Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council of NSW) 2007 Pressing Problems: Gambling issues and responses for NSW Aboriginal communities, AHMRC of NSW, Sydney.

AIATSIS (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies) 2002 Guidelines for Ethical Research in Indigenous Studies, AIATSIS, Canberra.

--2011 Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies, AIATSIS, Canberra.

Altman, Jon 1985 'Gambling as a mode of redistributing and accumulating cash among Aborigines: A case study from Arnhem Land' in G Caldwell, B Haig, D Sylvan and L Sylvan (eds), Gambling in Australia, Croom Helm, Sydney, pp.50-67.

Atkinson, Judy 2002 Trauma Trails Recreating Songlines: The transgenerational effects of trauma in Indigenous Australia, Spinifex Press, Melbourne.

Baturo, Annette and Tom Cooper 2007 'Supporting Indigenous numeracy', presentation for the Indigenous Capacity Building Research Program, Centre for Learning Innovation, Queensland University of Technology Faculty of Education, Brisbane, 14 February.

Berndt, Ronald and Catherine Berndt 1946-47 'Card games among the Aborigines of Northern Territory', Oceania 17(3):248-69.

--and Catherine Berndt 1987 End of an Era: Aboriginal labour in the Northern Territory, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra.

Binde, Per 2005 'Gambling across cultures: Mapping worldwide occurrence and learning from ethnographic comparison', International Gambling Studies 5 (5): 1-27.

Blainey, Geoffrey 1975 Triumph of the Nomads: A history of ancient Australia, Sun Books, Melbourne.

Braun, Virginia and Victoria Clarke 2006 'Using thematic analysis in psychology', Qualitative Research in Psychology 3:77-101.

Breen, Helen 2012 'Risk and protective factors associated with gambling consequences for Indigenous Australians in north Queensland', International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction 10(2):258-72.

Broome, Richard 2001 Aboriginal Australians: Black responses to white dominance 1788-2001 (3rd edn), Allen & Unwin, Sydney.

Christie, Michael and John Greatorex 2009 Workshop Report: Regulated gambling and problem gambling among Aborigines from remote Northern Territory communities: A Yolgnu case study, Charles Darwin University, Darwin.

--, Yiniya Guyula, Kathy Gotha and Dhangal Gurruwiwi 2010 'The ethics of teaching from country', Australian Aboriginal Studies 2010/2:69-80.

CIRCA (Cultural & Indigenous Research Centre Australia) 2011 Development of Culturally Appropriate Problem Gambling Services for Indigenous Communities, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra (Occasional Paper No. 40).

Creswell, John 2003 Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Davis, Michael and Sarah Holcombe 2010 '"Whose ethics?": Codifying and enacting ethics in research settings', Australian Aboriginal Studies 2010/2:1-9.

Denzin, Norman and Yvonna Lincoln 2008 'Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research' in N Denzin and Y Lincoln (eds), Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry (3rd edn), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp.1-44.

Dodd, Reg and R Vaughan 1985 'Aboriginal gambling and self-determination in Queensland' in G Caldwell, B Haig, D Sylvan and L Sylvan (eds), Gambling in Australia, Croom Helm, Sydney, pp.46-9.

Foote, Robin 1996 "Aboriginal gambling: Forces, phases and factors in development', presentation to the 7th Annual Conference of the National Association of Gambling Studies, Adelaide, November.

Gnibi Langford, Ruby 1994 My Bundjalung People, University of Queensland Press, Brisbane.

Goodale, Jane 1987 'Gambling is hard work: Card playing in Tiwi society', Oceania 58(1):6-21.

Grant, Stan 2002 Tears of Strangers, Harper Collins Publishers, Sydney.

Guba, Egon and Yvonna Lincoln 1989 Fourth Generation Evaluation, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.

Haebich, Anna 1988 For Their Own Good: Aborigines and government in the southwest of Western Australia, 1900-1940, University of Western Australia, Perth.

Hagan, Stephen 2005 The N Word, One Man's Stand, Magabala Books, Broome, WA.

Harney, William 1969 Brimming Billabongs, Rigby Ltd, Adelaide.

Holcombe, Sarah 2010 'The arrogance of ethnography: Managing anthropological research knowledge', Australian Aboriginal Studies 2010/2:10-22.

Horton, David 1996 Aboriginal Australia, Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra.

Hunter, Ernest 1993 Aboriginal Health and History: Power and prejudice in remote Australia, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

--and Randolph Spargo 1988 'What's the big deal? Aboriginal gambling in the Kimberley region', Medical Journal of Australia 149: 668-72.

Keefe, Kevin 2003 Paddy's Road Life: Stories of Patrick Dodson, Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra.

Korn, David and Howard Shaffer 1999 'Gambling and the health of the public: Adopting a public health perspective', Journal of Gambling Studies 15(4):289-365.

Lockyer, Betty 1999 'War baby' in Holding Up the Sky: Aboriginal women speak, Magabala Books, Broome, WA, pp.21-6.

McDonald, Heather and Bernadette Wombo 2006 Indigenous Gambling Scoping Study--Draft report, School for Social and Policy Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin.

Macknight, Campbell 1976 The Voyage to Marenge: Macassan trepangers in Northern Australia, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.

McKnight, David 2002 From Hunting to Drinking: The devastating effects of alcohol on an Australian Aboriginal community, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.

Martin, David 1993 Autonomy and relatedness: An ethnography of Wik people of Aurukun, Western Cape York Peninsula, doctoral thesis, Australian National University, Canberra.

Martin, Karen 2003 'Ways of knowing, being and doing: A theoretical framework and methods for Indigenous and indigenist research', Journal of Australian Studies 27(76):203-14.

--2008 Please Knock Before You Enter: Aboriginal regulation of outsiders and the implications for researchers, Post Pressed, Brisbane.

Morgan, Sally 1989 Wanamurraganya: The story of Jack McPhee, Fremantle Arts Centre Press, Fremantle, WA.

NHMRC (National Health and Medical Research Council) 2003 Values and Ethics: Guidelines for ethical conduct in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health research, Australian Government, Canberra, <www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/e65.pdf> accessed 3 May 2012.

--2007 National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research, Australian Government, Canberra, <www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/ e72syn.htm> accessed 3 May 2012.

Patton, Michael 1990 Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (2nd edn), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Phillips, Gregory 2003 Addictions and Healing in Aboriginal Country, Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra.

Productivity Commission 1999 Australia's Gambling Industries, Ausinfo, Canberra (Inquiry Report No. 10).

--2010 Gambling, Productivity Commission, Canberra. QSR International 2008 QSR N8, QSR International Pry, Melbourne.

Randall, Bob 2003 Songman: The story of an Aboriginal Elder, ABC Books, Sydney.

Rigney, Lester-Irabinna 1997 'Internationalism of an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander anti-colonial cultural critique of research methodologies: A guide to indigenist research methodology and its principles', Research and Development in Higher Education: Advancing International Perspectives 20: 629-36.

Rolls, Eric 1992 Sojourners: The epic story of China's centuries old relationship with Australia, University of Queensland Press, Brisbane.

Shaffer, Howard and David Korn 2002 'Gambling and related mental disorders: A public health analysis', Annual Review of Public Health 23:171-212.

Stevens, Matthew and Martin Young 2009 Reported Gambling Problems in the Indigenous and Total Australian Population, Gambling Research Australia, Melbourne.

Tonkinson, Robert 1974 The Jigalong Mob: Aboriginal victors of the desert crusade, Cummings Publishing Co. Inc., California.

WHO (World Health Organization) 1986 'Health promotion: A discussion document on the concepts and principles', Health Promotion 1(1):73-6.

Wild, Rex and Pat Anderson 2007 Ampe A kelyernemane Meke Mekarle, "'Little Children Are Sacred": Report of the Northern Territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse, Northern Territory Government, Darwin.

Dr Helen Breen

Centre for Gambling Education and Research, Southern Cross University

Helen Breen, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer at the School of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Southern Cross University, and an Australian Research Council Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centre for Gambling Education and Research.

As a social scientist, she has more than 15 years of research experience in the field of gambling and six years of research experience with Aboriginal people who are involved with or interested in gambling. Breen's research for her doctoral thesis, 'Risk and protective factors associated with Indigenous gambling in north Queensland' (2010), was conducted over four years, 2006-2010. Since then and with several others she has undertaken quantitative gambling research at Indigenous festivals and events in New South Wales and south-east Queensland. Dr Breen has published widely in areas such as meanings of Aboriginal gambling, ethics and Aboriginal gambling research, risk and protective factors associated with gambling, and help-seeking for gambling-related problems.

<helen.breen@scu.edu.au>