目的：毒品成癮者能否順利重返社會、戒除毒癮，家庭一直是重要關鍵因素之一；但毒癮者與不同家屬角色對於家庭需求、家庭功能與家庭支持的看法是否有差異，雖有少數研究探討，卻始終缺乏整合性論述。
方法：採用量化與質性研究並行，以南部某戒治所2011年接受戒癮處遇的毒癮者及其家屬為研究對象，共計86名家屬、164名毒癮者完成基本資料表、家庭支持量表、家庭功能量表，並進行統計考驗比較；另有5組毒癮者及其家屬接受質性訪談，以釐清家庭需求、家庭功能與家庭支持，在吸毒前、吸毒後與戒治後的變化。結果：量化方面，毒癮者自認為家庭功能優於家屬所認為，也認為家屬提供的實質性支持比家屬所認為還要高；在家屬當中，以父母認為的家庭功能為最高、衝突最少；質性研究顯示，毒癮者的家庭功能本就較缺乏「督導功能」、「人際溝通」和「問題解決」，開始接觸毒品後，讓毒癮者原本不足的家庭功能出現更多危機，但在接受戒治之後，家庭因聯繫的受限制與專業輔導人力介入，而展現較多「家庭凝聚力」與「家庭責任」。結論與建議：不論吸毒前後，毒癮者與其家屬原有的家庭功能與家庭支持即處於其特有的平衡狀態，原生家庭的父母親對於吸毒子女的高包容性、也更習於家庭內的責任分配與互動模式，入所戒治則提供整體家庭重新學習正向情感表達與情感支持的契機。另一方面，因毒癮者在家庭內的角色功能的邊緣化，「戒癮」成為整體家庭議題，建議可強化毒癮者在家庭中的角色責任，祈能順利回歸家庭。

The Purposes:The roles of family often are crucial and importance for abstinence and life adjustment on illicit drugs abusers. However, little literature paid more attention to examine the differences between illicit drugs abusers and their family members in terms of family demand, family functions and family support. The present study was to clarify and examine family-related variables in a sample of illicit drugs abusers and whose family members. Method: Both qualitative and quantitative designs were conducted in this study. In 2011, illicit drug abusers and whose families were recruited in the present study. After inform consented, 164 illicit drug abusers and 86 family members were asked to completed personal information, family support questionnaire and family function scale. Additionally, 5-paired illicit drugs abusers and whose families were interviewed in order to clarify the relationships among family demand, family support and family functions. Results: In quantitative results, several significant differences were found in terms of subscale of substantial supports in family support questionnaire, sum scores, subscales
of communication, problem-solving, independence, family duty and family conflict of family function questionnaire between illicit drug abusers and whose families. About qualitative results, we found perceived beliefs of family demand were inconsistent between illicit drug abusers and whose families, and they overly emphasized recent status and severity of addiction in illicit drug abusers rather than the whole family demand.
Conclusions and Suggestions: This study found that each illicit drug abuser and family still kept specific balance between family demand and family functions. Relapse for addiction was a risky task in every stage of family development, but relapse for illicit drugs did not crucially destroy the cohesion in their families. Furthermore, it is not only very important
to decrease family loading and empowerment self-cares for family member, but to enhance the roles of monitoring and support in preventing relapse for drug abusers are also considered in further intervention program of illicit drug abusers.