The statement below is from your post and if I still understand English, it means you are supporting the opinion that Blockchain and KYC can be deployed to handle self exclusion and by extension gambling addiction. That was the statement I referenced in my comment. If the statement mean something else, then make me understand.
" It is studied that gambling addiction can be addressed by integrating Blockchain technology coupled with KYC to trigger an automatic self-exclusion program."
It is the self-exclusion, not the KYC, that helps in minimizing gambling addiction. Blockchain + KYC is just a tool to identify players that is going to the path of addiction. Blockchain for onchain activity, and on-chain gambling analytics and patterns, KYC for identifying the owner of the address.
The one you wrote enclosed in quotation marks tells it all. Thus, it is not the KYC but the self-exclusion.
First of all, casino isn`t interesting in it. They don`t need to care about addicts - they make money and don`t want to pay for decreasing their profit.
That is on them; we are discussing how Blockchain + KYC can improve self-exclusion in preventing gambling addiction. Not whether casinos will accept it or not.

After all, if the regulatory board requires it, they need to follow, if not, then the casino is entitled to their decision

.
The second - if casino would share other casinos only your wallet - you can create new wallet easily. If they would share your data and wallet - it seems that they would break a law. Also it can be used against gamblers. If one casino will block you or even just restrict in any way - they can share it to other casinos.
I think you need to read this article:
https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/news/article/online-operators-required-to-participate-in-gamstop-from-march-2020 to see specifically if cross-platform sharing of self-exclusion data is illegal.