近年來，少年施用毒品日益嚴重，本研究特別側重第一線的執法人員，並以警察單位專精於少年各項刑案工作的少年警察隊成員作為研究對象，試圖釐清少年施用毒品的現狀。本研究方法係採質性研究，以立意抽樣方式透過研究者個人在各縣、市服務的人脈或同事的推薦對查察少年施用毒品專精的警察，以半結構方式訪談，另分別選擇訪談了新竹市、台中市、嘉義縣、嘉義市等四位具有相當豐富實務經驗之警務人員。首先，單純施用毒品少年於刑事司法體系中的定義應明確，以利政策的推動及立法規劃。其次，防治對象應細分「一般少年」、「少年有施用毒品之虞」、「少年施用毒品」對於少年施用毒品的防治作為，應從目前「確認施用毒品」前置到「有施用毒品之虞」來規劃防治作為。並依據不同對象進行相異的防治作為以及適宜的宣導方式。另應訂定少年毒品防治條例。對於單純施用毒品之少年或有施用毒品之虞少年，以「被害人」的方式對該等少年進行立即保護，並以針對少年可能施用毒品的原因進行評估，該項評估宜應由法院以個案方式為其量身訂定保護方式，施以教化課程，希望吸毒少年能即時隔離不良環境，有時間及空間檢討自身行為。在隔離其不良環境的同時，相對亦能對因外在環境產生較強的約束，改變已施用毒品少年之可能。次者亦能影響有心想施用而尚未施用的少年產生嚇阻作用。最後，中央應明定專門預算，以利本政策全力推動。

In recent years, juvenile drug use has become increasingly serious. This study lays particular emphasis on law enforcement officers in the first line, and takes members of Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Bridge, the police unit specializing in juvenile criminal cases work, as the research object to try to clarify the status of juvenile drug use. The research method adopts qualitative research and a purposive sampling method, Through this researcher's personal connections serving in various counties and cities or colleague recommendations, the method of semi-structured interviews is conducted with police specializing in investigation of juvenile drug use. Taking into account urban-rural gap, four police officers are separately interviewed with very rich practical experience from Hsinchu City, Taichung City, Chiayi County and Chiayi City. Simple juvenile drug use should be clearly defined in the criminal justice system in order to facilitate the promotion of policy and legislative planning. Secondly, the control objects should be separated into the categories of “general juveniles”, juveniles who are likely to take drugs”, “juveniles taking drugs”. Prevention and treatment of juvenile drug abuse should be advanced from the present “confirmation of drug abuse”to “potential danger of taking drrugs ” in order to plan prevention actions. Then, according to different objects, carry out different prevention measures. For example, by way of advocacy, you can implement advocacy via different ways for different objects. Secondly, we should set Juvenile Drug Prevention Act for simple drug abuse in juveniles, or teenagers in danger of taking drugs, via a “victim” approach immediately protect such juveniles. We should also assess the likely reasons for juvenile drug abuse. The courts should formulate tailor-made ways of protection for them on a case-by case basis, and impose drug education courses. Additionally, immediately isolate the adverse environment, so that juveniles have space and time to review their own behavior. By isolating them relatively poor environment and, at the same time generating strong constraints on their external environments, change may be produced for juvenile who have been taking drugs. It can also bring about a deterrent effect for the young generation intending to take drugs but not yet taking them. Finally, the central government should specifically stipulate a budget to facilitate an all-out effort to promote this policy.