You see, people don't know many things, they believe everything can be done the way anyone likes it, but it's not always so. In a sane world, there are rules and everyone has their quote to contribute, or else things would go out of control. Talking about the house's responsibility in this context, in some countries, you would not be able to operate a casino without fully registering and being regulated, and if you do all these, you have to obey the rules as operators. One of the rules is for you to have the welfare of your customers at heart, particularly those who could be going through financial and addiction challenges. As much as the house would not know everyone personally to build relationships with them to know the problem to ship in their advice and recommendations, they are mandated to have the "Self-exclusion" feature on their website.
This applies to land-based casinos too, and it's just like signing an agreement that such a person will not visit their casino for a certain period due to a specific reason. However, I've read a series of cases that casinos do not obey as they allow such people to cancel the feature and start gambling again. But the government should not hear such as it's a very serious offence in some countries like the UK as it's a layer to force the house to take responsibility too.
The highest that they can do is to set an age limit which has already been set to 18+ or better still have a self-exclusion feature, but anything outside these two, the casino sees it as a drawback for their profit since they are in the business for the profits.