In addition, Romanovski criticizes the implicit prejudice in the decision, suggesting that it disregards the financial autonomy of beneficiaries. In his view, the most effective solution to mitigate the damages of betting is not exclusion, but rather combating illegal gambling and investing in financial education.
“The intention is to protect, but the result may be the opposite. The recent decision by the Federal Government and the Supreme Court to restrict access to betting sites by Bolsa Família and social program beneficiaries is based on a good intention: to protect the most vulnerable.
But we need to look beyond the surface. Instead of protecting, the measure may end up pushing these people into the underground world of illegal gambling, where there is no control, security or tax collection.
Even more serious: it reinforces a structural prejudice that those who receive aid are not capable of making choices for themselves — even if these choices involve risks. This is a worrying step in the opposite direction of individual freedom and financial inclusion.
If the goal is to reduce harm, the most efficient path is to combat illegal gambling and invest in financial education — not pure and simple exclusion.
Public decisions should be judged not only by their intention, but mainly by the results they generate.”
Source: GMB
