Wagner-von Papp, FH (2009) Self-exclusion agreements: Should we be free not to be free to ruin ourselves? :: Gambling, self-exclusion and the brain. In: Freeman, MDA and Goodenough, OR, (eds.) Law, mind and brain. (81 - 126). Ashgate Pub Co: Farnham UK / Burlington US.
Full text not available from this repository.
Willpower is bounded. In order to cope with bounded willpower, humans put up ‘self-paternalistic’ safeguards to shield themselves from diminished self-control when faced with temptations. Willpower is especially bounded where ‘addictions’ are concerned. This chapter focuses on the legal treatment of one specific class of safeguards against limited self-control: Self-exclusion agreements between casinos and problem gamblers, in which the gambler vows not to return to the casino. The common denominator of all ‘self-paternalistic’ safeguards is that the actor tries to limit his or her future strategy space in order to maximise his or her perceived overall self-interest. The limitation of the future autonomy is itself autonomously chosen. This leads to the philosophical and legal question, to what degree (if at all) it is possible to limit one’s future autonomy.
|Title:||Self-exclusion agreements: Should we be free not to be free to ruin ourselves? :: Gambling, self-exclusion and the brain|
|Keywords:||Law, Self-exclusion, Gambling, Casino, willpower, bounded rationality, addiction, self-paternalism|
|UCL classification:||UCL > School of Arts and Social Sciences > Faculty of Laws|
Archive Staff Only: edit this record