Bobbe McGinley has worked with Problem and Compulsive gamblers since being Certified by the Arizona Council on Compulsive Gambling, Inc. She is Clinical Director, Counselor and Consultant at ACT Counseling and Education. Reach her at 602-569-4328 or visit www.actcounseling.com 

The mini-intervention happens frequently, and is favored by many, but it can be a very difficult experience. One concerned person alone confronting a gambler is the most tried and least successful way to intervene. These mini-intervention efforts certainly don’t fail for lack of concern or effort. But the underlying dynamics of these confrontations doom most attempts. Unless the confronting person has special training and preparation, the conversation usually degenerates into generalities and accusations such as "you’ve turned into a degenerate gambler and you are ruining our marriage." To which the gambler replies with a full range of defensive and manipulative behaviors. By the time the conversation is over, the confronter often feels guilty for having raised the subject and is convinced much of the gambling problem might be their fault. These highly charged and often argumentative and judgmental encounters can be refined and made useful, however, if certain ground rules are followed and a few simple skills practiced.

The mini-intervention approach has an important place in the overall intervention scheme. Although one such confrontation by itself is seldom effective, there often is a positive and cumulative result when conducted on a frequent and recurring basis. The gambling person’s delusion and denial can be gradually undermined when many of those who care about him stop enabling, break the no-talk rules, and consistently hold them accountable for their behavior.

Mini-interventions seem frightening because past experience has taught us to expect anger, denial, and all the other defenses and manipulations that accompany addiction. The result is often to wish we had not raised the subject or even leaves us feeling the whole mess is not worth the effort. Take a lesson from politicians. They hire media consultants to teach them how to keep interviews focused on their agenda, not the interviewers; and develop a core message.

Questions asked or arguments raised receive a brief response and then they bridge to their core message. You can apply the same skill to your mini-intervention attempts. Your core message should sound something like this: "Gary, I’m very concerned about you. Last night you came in after being out for 18 hours of gambling. You told horrible jokes in front of my parents. Nobody laughed, they just stared in disbelief. I heard my Dad mutter, "There goes the family disgrace again. We are going to have to do something about him." I know how much being liked and accepted by my parent’s means to you. There is a program here in town that can help us with the way gambling is affecting our lives. All I have to do is call and set up an appointment for an assessment. Will you go with me?"

When Gary responds, "Your father is an old prude. I was just having a good time," or some other alibi or excuse, don’t get hooked into an argument. Bridge to your core message: "Maybe he is. Still, I am very concerned and I know you wouldn’t have embarrassed yourself if you had been responsible and had been home instead of gambling. Let’s talk to a professional who can help us."

You can avoid arguments and maintain win-win dynamics with this technique. So compose and mentally rehearse your core message. The content will vary from time to time but the outline is the same—one of concern. Having a well rehearsed message is the key to effective mini-intervention attempts. This technique takes the fear out of speaking up. It also offers hope to finding a solution in the forefront of your relationship. Next we month we will look at intervention outlines and various actual statements.