Report
Lived experiences of affected others: Qualitative research
Lived experiences of affected others: Qualitative research
Consequences
Sensitive content warning
This webpage refers to the sensitive topic of suicide. Please consider whether you are comfortable with accessing this section of the website.
The GSGB data shows that affected others are most likely to report health consequences (73.7 percent), followed by relationship consequences (65.3 percent) and resource consequences (42.5 percent).
Affected others in this study described harm that spanned these 3 areas, rarely staying contained within any 1 domain. The most consistent finding across the sample was not the severity of any single type of consequence, but the way consequences compounded and reinforced each other over time. Financial strain created relationship tension; relationship tension generated anxiety and shame; shame and exhaustion eroded the capacity to seek help. Understanding this interconnection is as important as understanding any individual consequence.
1: Health consequences
Health consequences were the most widely reported across the sample, consistent with the GSGB findings. Stress and anxiety were near-universal, described as a sustained state of hypervigilance that marked daily life. Participants described lying awake at night, monitoring behaviour and finances, and living in a constant low-level state of alert that was exhausting to maintain.
"I moved from being responsible to being anxious... Then depression and sadness, having this big secret I had to hold and couldn't tell anybody about."
- Male non-gambler, 31, brother of person gambling
Guilt and self-blame were consistently reported across relationship types and consequence severity levels. Participants questioned whether they had contributed to the problem, whether they had missed signs they should have seen, or whether their own responses had made things worse. For some, this guilt was acute, while for others it had calcified into a persistent self-criticism that was harder to shake.
"I felt partly responsible. Was it me making it worse by saying, 'let's stay in and gamble?'"
- Male gambler, 39, partner of person gambling
Shame operated differently from guilt; it was directed outward, towards how others might perceive the situation, and often tied to the stigma of being associated with harmful gambling. Several participants described actively concealing what was happening from friends, colleagues, and extended family, not only to protect the person gambling but to manage how they themselves were seen.
"People see me like a loser, someone that cannot help her partner. It reflects badly. And bad is not even the right word, there should be something higher4 than bad."
- Female non-gambler, 28, partner of person gambling
Physical health impacts were reported less frequently but were significant where they did occur. One participant described losing a significant amount of weight during a period when she was concealing her son's gambling debts.
"It was as if my body was holding itself together until it couldn't anymore. When I held my hands up, it was as if my body said, right, we're done."
- Female gambler, 59, mother of person gambling
For participants whose experience extended over a period of years, the cumulative health impact was substantial.
Bea, who had been married to her husband for over 35 years when his gambling escalated, described reaching a point of complete emotional collapse.
"I thought, should I just end my own life because it might be easier? With the rage I had in me, I would have quite happily got in my car and just put it through a brick wall."
Specialist support for affected others helped her through her lowest points, but the trust in her marriage has been permanently changed.
- Female non-gambler, 54, partner of person gambling
2: Relationship consequences
Relationship harm was the second most commonly reported domain in the Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB), and the most emotionally complex in participants' accounts. Trust was the central casualty not only in the person gambling’s honesty around gambling, but a broader erosion of the sense of safety and reliability that had previously defined the relationship.
The transition from partner to monitor was a theme that emerged repeatedly. Participants described checking bank statements, tracking phone usage, managing finances, and maintaining a constant background awareness of the person gambling’s whereabouts and state of mind. This was a role they had not chosen and had not anticipated.
For some participants the relationship survived but was fundamentally altered.
Sophie had been close friends with Ben for decades. Gambling was part of their shared past. Over time, his behaviour became more isolated and harder to reach; he would cancel plans and speak vaguely about money. Sophie sensed something was wrong but avoided pressing the issue to preserve the friendship.
"I never wanted to challenge it or accuse him of lying because I didn't want him to shut me out completely."
The reality emerged abruptly during an unplanned visit, when she discovered Ben was facing serious financial crisis, had sold possessions belonging to family members, and was close to eviction. The damage, she felt, was less about gambling itself.
"It's not the gambling that's the issue, it's the lying."
Although they remain in contact, the friendship has changed. Sophie has lost the trust she once had in Ben.
- Female gambler, 38, friend of person gambling
Where relationships ended, the harm did not stop at the point of separation. Several participants described ongoing financial entanglement, shared debt, or the continued impact of the relationship breakdown on children and wider family. The GSGB shows that relationship breakdown is the most commonly reported severe consequence (reported by 74.3 percent of those who experienced at least one severe consequence) and these accounts help explain why that is, and what it means in practice. For some affected others, the relational consequences extended outward to affect other relationships in their life.
Cody spent years giving his brother large sums of money and hiding it from his wife. He felt it was a family matter to handle between brothers. As their savings began to disappear with no explanation, his wife assumed he was having an affair.
"I lied to my wife and she’s supposed to be my best friend"
Even after she discovered the truth, the damage had been done. It was only when his marriage was close to breaking point that Cody recognised how far things had gone, and sought help.
- Male non-gambler, 31, brother of person gambling
These relational consequences sometimes resulted in altered life plans, preventing some participants from following through on pre-existing plans they had held for the future.
Dana and her partner had been making plans - to travel, to have a child together. Gradually, the effects of his gambling eroded all of it. He stopped going to the gym, stopped eating properly, stopped being able to afford the basics.
"His spark's gone. He's just so stressed."
She now finds herself acting as a financial backstop, transferring money to cover his car insurance and telling him not to pay her back.
"I have my own child. I have my own bills, my own outgoings."
The future they planned together has faded.
"I feel like his financial issues involving the gambling is blocking me, it's pulling me back."
- Female non-gambler, 33, partner of person gambling
3: Resource consequences
Resource consequences were reported less frequently than health or relationship harms in the GSGB (42.5 percent), but featured prominently in participants' accounts, particularly among those in close financial relationships with the person gambling, and those who had been drawn into managing or absorbing debts.
The most immediate resource consequences were financial: depleted savings, undisclosed debt, reduced spending on essential items, and in more severe cases, loss of housing or significant assets. What participants described went beyond the financial figures, however. The experience of having money disappear without explanation, of discovering debts they had not known about, or of realising that savings they had believed secure were gone, carried a sense of betrayal and loss of control that was difficult to separate from the emotional consequences.
"I just went into panic mode. We had almost £20,000 saved up - I used it to pay off some of the debts to get ourselves straight. And then there was the 'surprise birthday holiday' he'd taken money out for. There was no holiday. It was all spent in the local bookies - about £48,000 in total."
- Female non-gambler, 54, partner of person gambling
Many participants had developed informal financial management strategies in response, such as ensuring bills were paid first on payday, maintaining separate accounts, monitoring transactions closely. These strategies were improvised rather than planned, and they came at a cost.
Ellie, a professional and the primary earner in her household, had adapted her financial behaviour over the years to accommodate her husband's gambling. She shifts grocery shopping onto a credit card each month to keep cash accessible and will sometimes ask her mother to bring forward her usual contribution to the children’s activities to cover shortfalls elsewhere.
"It just feels like every week I'm giving money away. We're stuck in a rut."
The turning point came on a family holiday, when she discovered he'd spent the children's birthday money on bets while she was ill in the hotel room.
"That was probably when I first realised it's a bit of a problem. Despite all his principles, he couldn't help himself."
- Female non-gambler, 45, partner of person gambling
For those in longer-term situations, resource consequences had accumulated into something more entrenched.
For Greta, her husband’s gambling has been constant for years. It was only over time that the financial consequences began to become known to her; wages were disappearing, payday loans were taken out without her knowledge. These loans were never fully resolved.
"To this day, we’re still paying them."
She stayed in her marriage, weighing up what leaving would mean for their children, while knowing the financial imbalance would be unlikely to change.
- Female gambler, 34, partner of person gambling
How consequences evolve, and why timing matters
A central finding of this research is that affected others’ harm evolves alongside the gambling behaviour of the person gambling, but frequently lags behind it. By the time an affected other recognises and names what is happening, harm has often already accumulated across multiple domains. This lag has direct implications for when intervention is possible and what form it can usefully take.
Chronic harm (the persistent, low-level consequences experienced by affected others who have adjusted their lives around the person who is gambling without ever reaching, or after moving on from, a formal crisis point) is largely invisible to current measurement. These are not people in acute crisis, but rather people who have adapted to sustain the relationship. For some participants, their accounts spanned years or decades.
Timing also shaped how consequences compounded. Early-stage harm, where it went unrecognised, allowed patterns and behaviours to become entrenched. By the time of crisis, financial, relational, and health consequences were typically so prevalent and intertwined that addressing any one of them in isolation was insufficient. This interconnection, and the non-linearity of the journey, is one of the clearest arguments for understanding affected other harm as a dynamic, cumulative process as opposed to a set of discrete, measurable events.
Relationship type and proximity
Relationship type played a role in the experience of affected others in ways that cut across all 3 consequence domains.
Partners and spouses described the most intensive and sustained harm from living alongside the person gambling, sharing finances, and carrying the daily weight of management and vigilance.
Parents and caregivers described a particular form of sustained fear, oriented around the well-being and survival of a child, alongside deep self-blame for not having seen the signs earlier.
"It breaks me to think he was in such a low place and I didn't even know. I blame myself sometimes... I hated myself because I just didn't see it."
- Female non-gambler, 48, mother to person gambling
Adult children described the added complexity of role reversal, where they saw themselves as becoming the responsible party for a parent who they felt ought to have been a source of stability.
Siblings, friends, and colleagues often described harm that was somewhat more bounded, characterised by a difficult question of how much responsibility to take on, and when to step back.
"It's just so disappointing. It's heartbreaking. There's a really popular lad who just ruined his life, for what?"
- Male gambler, 49, brother of person gambling
Closely related to this is the matter of (emotional and physical) proximity. Affected others who lived with the person gambling, or who were closely financially entangled, described more intensive and sustained consequences than those at greater distance. The same is true of affected others who were more emotionally invested in their relationship with the person gambling. This means that some affected others may not live with the person gambling nor be financially connected but still experience harm.
The next section of the main report can be found on the Affected others’ experiences with gambling page.
References
4 Sic: worse, more intense.
Last updated: 25 June 2026
Show updates to this content
No changes to show.