Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities

2004, Vol. 29, No. 3, 194-209

copyright 2004 by
TASH

Explorations of the Functions of Humor

and Other Types of Fun Among Families
of Children With Disabilities
Alicja Rieger
Utica College
This article presents a qualitative study of six families
of children with disabilities and their perspectives on humor. The findings revealed that the families had an understanding of humor that went beyond the generalized
humor construct. They embraced both the concept of
httmor and "other types of fun." Furthermore, the families' attempts at defining humor focused on functional
and situational approaches to humor involving its use as
(a) a means of releasing negative emotions and as a
natural stress remedy, (b) a means of learning, (c) a form
of problem solving, (d) a means of connecting, (e) a
form of communication, (f) a means of preventing others from engaging in a putdown, (g) an expression of
freedom, (h) a means of building optimistic thinking,
and (i) a form of discovering a playful spirit in oneself
A discussion of the findings and suggestions for further
research on humor are offered.
DESCRIPTORS: humor, fatnilies, qualitative research
Researchers across various fields have acknowledged
the importance of humor in our lives. According to
sociologists, for example, humor is firmly embedded in
the fabric of society (Burbach & Babbitt, 1993; Chapman, 1976; Foot, Chapman, & Smith, 1980; Hertzler,
1970). In traditional societies humor was used to define
acceptable behavior through the activities of ritual
clowns (Rutter, 2000). In modern society, comedians do
social sanctioning. Lyttle (2003) wrote, "Humor is used
to gently correct someone's manners while saving face
for everyone involved" (p. 3).
Psychologists define humor as a means of improving
one's quality of life by adopting an affirmative and joyful view of the world (Ziv, 1984). The experience of
humor, as it unfolds from childhood to adulthood, with
an emphasis on the need to discover an attitude of playfulness for all ages is commonly discussed (Christie,
1994; Olson & Roese, 1995). Furthermore, the devel-

opment of a sense of humor in people often is attributed therapeutic qualities (Chapman & ChapmanSantana, 1995). Also the use ofa humorous "self," as an
integrated personality, is frequently mentioned
(Hampes, 1992, 1999; Kirsh & Kuiper, 2003; Martin &
Kuiper, 1999; Martin, Puhlik-Doris, Larsen, Gray, &
Weir, 2003).
Existential philosophers and spiritual writers have
also acknowledged the importance of humor in one's
hfe and survival. Dixon (1980), for instance, incorporated humor into existential philosophy and suggested
that humor might be used to initiate cognitive shifts and
changes in one's purpose, meaning, and quality of life.
Welliver (1986) considered a humorous approach as "a
flexible way of experiencing life" (p. 5). And Morreall
(1983) defined humor as a way of approaching life with
a merry spirit. Humor has its place in even the most
life-threatening circumstances. According to Lipman
(1991), for instance, jokes were the most popular form
of mocking every facet of life and death in the Nazi
camps. "Humor cropped up in many guises, on many
subjects, during the Nazi era. It was conveyed in many
formssituational quips, art, poetry, classical music,
and work songsbut jokes were the most common medium" (p. 17).
Although some researchers have acknowledged the
value of humor and studied it extensively, defining the
concept itself has been a challenge. In other words, in
the past two centuries, a great deal of humor research
was centered on the question of just what constitutes
humor (Chapman, 1976; Martin, 2001; McGhee &
Goldstein, 1983), and it would seem that the issue is still
far from resolved. Ostrover (2003) pointed to the fact
that theorists continue to debate the conceptual and
operational distinctions between humor and laughter.
Lyttle (2003) argued that efforts to define humor remain elusive:
There is no general theory of humor or even an
agreed definition . . . What is humor, exactly? The
question seems pointlessbecause we can all
think of examples of humor, and we all 'know it
when we see it.' However, when we try to define
exactly what does and what does not count as hu-

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to

Alicja Rieger, Assistant Professor of Education, Utica College, 1600 Burrstone Road, Utica, NY 13502-4892. E-mail:
ajarzab@utica.edu
194

195

Humor and Other Types of Fun

mor, or how humor operates, we find it quite difficult (p. 1).

Disability and Humor

There appears to be even more confusion about the
meaning of humor within the context of disability: the
humor may be directed toward a condition of disability
or the humor may itself be "disabling" (Baum, 1998;
Burbach & Babbitt, 1993). Thus, the "disabled humor"
was considered by many to be an unworthy research
area. Cassell (1985) pointed out that "Until now, no
theorist or researcher has treated disabled humor as a
subject worthy of separate investigatory or theoretical
exposition" (p. 59). Albrecht (1999) contributed to the
discussion on disability-related humor by summarizing
the most common difficulties researchers face in applying humor to disability: "Discovering humor in disability is difficult... What is so funny about having a disability when others think that it is a tragedy? Besides,
finding humor in disability is not politically correct; it is
mean-spirited and denigrates those with disabilities"
(p. 67).
But on reflection, it is hard not to notice a hidden
paradox in the context of disability-related humor literature. On one hand, it seemed pohtically incorrect to
seriously study the matter of humor since the disability
itself was perceived as a "serious" matter. At the same
time it was acceptable to make fun of those "less able"
as a group via mass media channels and contemporary
literature. Anderson (1988) argued that American literature is full of humorous stories that stigmatize characters with physical and mental disabilities, "from Lennie in Of Mice and Men, to Charlie in Flowers for Algernon, to Wally in Cider House Rules" (p. 79).
According to Livneh (1980), even the cheerier features
of American culture treat individuals with disabilities as
victims or victimizers in a stereotypical way. Walt Disney, for example, offered Pegleg Pete to pester Mickey
and Goofy (who has a learning disability), and offered
the villainous Captain Hook in his adaptation of James
Barrie's Peter Pan.
Fry (1963) observed that cartoons have been popular
for many years, and they almost always provoke humor-disguised and disability-focused responses. Likewise, Weinberg and Santana (1978) defined comic
books as "champions of the disabled stereotype" (p.
327). The researchers reviewed 40 different comic
books that were available for purchase in either of two
large drugstores of a Midwestern city and found that
characters with physical disabilities were portrayed as
morally evil in 57% of the cases. Furthermore, the vast
majority of these comic characters were male (79%)
and white (81%). Within this context, Thurer (1980)
argued that comic books suffer greatly from underrepresentation and overrepresentation of individuals with
disabilities. They portray those with disabilities either

as incompetent and lacking skills or as "innocent,"

"blessed," and even "angels." Hunt speaks of "The Deformed Child" in a Boy's Yearly Book (cited in Davidson, Woodill, & Bredberg, 1994, p. 39) as "an angel
prisoned in an infant frame, of mortal sickness and deformity."
In the last century, dwarfs, rare monsters, giants,
"conjoined twins," bearded ladies, and those with other
oddities were popular performers in the American entertainment industry (Bogdan, 1988). These exhibits of
"oddities" were further emphasized by special effects,
which applied to the exhibitions, as well as by culturally
bound nonverbal elements such as physical appearance,
gestures, costumes, and accessories. All of these special
effects were meant to trigger the audience's curiosity
and laughter at the expense of the "less-able." A
twisted body meant a twisted mind and a twisted sense
of humor.
The cultural proclivity toward disability-related humor was adopted by the modern cinematic culture. The
monster in Shelley's Dr. Frankenstein and Stoker's
vampire Dracula (cited in Livneh, 1980) are two illustrations of authors' bizarre, and often unfortunate, preoccupations with bodily deformities. Livneh (1980) argued that this list could be expanded to include the
Golem, the mummy, fairy-tale witches, zombies, and
others. All of these creatures have at least one common
denominator: they suggest a special propensity for
monstrous behavior among those less "bodily-abled."
The film images of monstrosity helped continue the
tradition of both fearing and laughing at individuals
with physical infirmities or abnormalities.
In summary, "from a historical perspective, people
with disabilities have been a source of amusement to
able-bodied people. This has ranged from individuals
who were used as court jesters, exhibits of curiosity in
carnivals and side-shows, to cartoon characters who
have various disabilities" (Baum, 1998, October, p. 2).

Family and Humor

Similar negative attitudes and stereotyping descriptions operated in early literature on the family and humor. Negativity and "terminal seriousness" took the
lead (Singer & Irvin, 1989). Summers, Behr, and Turnbull (1989) stated that "Researchers and service providers in the field of developmental disabilities have
mirrored this societal perception, and tend to view the
family as a whole as embroiled in a series of acute crises
interspersed with chronic sorrow" (p. 27). In fact, until
the late 1980s, regardless of the cause or type of disability, most families were portrayed as coping with the
"loss of one child" while also coming to know and care
for the "remaining child" (Singer & Irvin, 1989). Stress
theories further served as conceptual frameworks for
the themes of most of these family experiences (Breslau
& Davis, 1986; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Pahl &

196

Quine, 1987; Singer & Irvin, 1989). Singer and Irvin

(1989) argued that in such a research framework there
was not much room left to look for humor within the
families of children with disabilities.
During the 1980s and early 1990s, however, there has
been a notable shift in philosophy and thought regarding the families of children with disabilities in terms of
humor. The perspective of the public, of professionals,
and of the families themselves has moved away from
the view that families are long-suffering and needy to a
more hopeful and realistic assessment of their strengths
and needs. O'Conner (1995, p. 67) wrote:
This chapter contrasts the traditional view of families of children with disabilities as going through a
process of grieving with a newly emerging view,
that of accepting relationships. These are relationships in which individuals are not viewed and
judged in terms of their differences, but rather are
seen as members of their families and accepted as
other children in the family are accepted.
A little less complacently, automatically, and absentmindedly, researchers and many families themselves
started to perceive their lives with a relative with a
disability as mutually beneficial, if not a gift (Ross,
1985; Shoultz, 1995; Slavin, 1989). Furthermore, some
marriages are strengthened, in part, through cooperation and a joyful sense of purpose in parenting a child
with a disability (Powell & Gallagher, 1993). Some
families, due to their more optimistic outlooks, become
more cohesive and adaptive in response to stressors
linked to having a family member with a disability, and
at the same time more responsive to humor emerging in
their own families (Samuelson, 1986).
Within this shift, several studies around family adjustment in the fields of psychology, medicine, counseling, family therapy, and special education emerged.
Melnick (1989) designed a study to empirically evaluate
the relationship between parental sense of humor and
family adaptation levels. Similarly, Francisco (1989) examined the relationship between the level of functioning in family systems and the families' adaptation level
and use of humor. Both Melnick and Francisco found a
significant positive correlation between a parental
sense of humor and family adaptation levels.
Brooks, Guthrie, and Gaylord (1999) examined the
differing family humor patterns when families managed
the unpredictability of multiple sclerosis, the daily selfcare of diabetes mellitus, or the pain of rheumatoid
arthritis. The researchers found that most of the family
humor was informal and spontaneous. Participants described it as "kidding around," "carrying on," "joking
around," or "giving each other some grief" (p. 155).
Interestingly, the illness was not the major topic for
family humor, but neither was it usually ignored as a
topic for humor. "When humor was reported around

Rieger

the illness, it was as a means to communicate how family members felt about the illness, as a way to monitor
the severity of the illness, a tool for changing moods, or
an encouragement for illness management" (p. 156).
Rao (1996) studied the perspectives of Bengali families of children with disabilities on the issues of inclusion and found that a sense of humor, particularly when
expressed as joking or teasing, was an effective coping
mechanism. He wrote:
While closeness and affection was one dimension
of some relationships, others were characterized
by humor . . . Humor was seen as an integral part
of relationships. Being able to tease and get teased
was considered an important aspect of affectionate
ties. (p. 190)
Jarzab (2004) conducted a qualitative inquiry on humor in three families of children with disabilities and
found that humor was not only looked upon as a valuable coping tool, but also was openly acknowledged as
a decidedly positive human trait. Specifically, the families' perceptions of humor involved both relationships
that were accepting and empowerment to move from
situations perceived as negative to situations perceived
more positively to "become greater than the situation"
itself. Families also acknowledged the need for studying
humor as a valuable coping mechanism. Adam, a parent of a child with Rett's syndrome, put it most succinctly when he said:
Humor is an important area that I don't think has
been explored to any depth, and yet I think it could
be one of the most important pieces in terms of
hopes for the families, in terms of the ability to
help others to accept their children with disabilities, accept them without their disability, in terms
of the ways of empowerment. Look for humor; go
through the steps of denial and then go forward,
(p. 40)
The use of humor in families with members with disabilities is an area of inquiry that has not obtained
enough attention to date. The purpose of this study was
to learn more about the perspectives on humor of families with members who have disabilities by asking:
1. How do families that include at least one member
with disabilities understand the concept of humor
itself?
2. What connections do the families make between
humor and disability?
3. What are the functions of humor in family's lives?

Method
Participants
Thirty members of six families participated in this
research. Among these were 12 adults (7 women, 5

197

Humor and Other Types of Fun

men). Their ages ranged from 33 to 85. Eighteen participants (7 girls and 11 boys) were the children in these
families. The children's ages ranged from 2 to 21.
Twelve of the children had disabilities: autism (3), mental retardation (1), cerebral palsy (1), traumatic brain
injury (1), attention deficit disorder (1), emotional disorder (1), sickle-cell disease (1), hearing impairment
(1), and multiple disabilities (2) (Table 1).
The families' structures demonstrated various elements of "jointness" (Gore, as cited in DeVault, 1991).
Gore explained "jointness" as the differing degrees of
closeness a family shares with its members. In this
study, this closeness was reflected in the structure of the
families, which varied from a "nuclear" family, to a
single-parent family, and to a foster care household.
One of these families included an extended family
member (i.e., a grandmother). In another family, the
foster care parent still kept in touch with her exhusband, who hved in close proximity to her household,
and he was considered a "father figure" for the
children. Thus, the families differed not only in the family structure but also in the levels of "jointness" (see
Table 1).
The families' ethnic backgrounds also varied. Four
families reported Caucasian for race. Among these

Families/ethnicity
Family 1
Caucasian

Family
structure
Nuclear family

families, three represented second-generation European backgrounds (i.e., Polish-Ukrainian, Polish-Irish,

Irish-Irish). One family was Latino American (i.e., Brazilian) in its origin, and its parents had a better mastery
of Portuguese and sign language than of English. One
family was African American, with foster care and
adopted children of various ethnic backgrounds. Those
included Italian, African American, French-African
American, and Native-African American. In addition,
one family adopted a child of Asian origin (a Vietnamese girl) (see Table 1).
The families were recruited from (a) a parent organization that was known to serve families that included
at least one member with disabilities, (b) referrals from
a local inclusive education program director, and (c)
referrals from university professors in an inclusive
education program. The level and type of the family
members' involvement in the study varied. First, the
primary informants were the parents of children with
disabilities who described the humor and playful interactions of all family members. Second, all participants
were observed to varying extents. Third, in some families, children with disabilities and their siblings were
interviewed individually or with other family members
(Table 2).

Table 1
Participant Demographic Information
Geographic Family members'
Age
location
status
Suburban

mother
father
son

Asian
Family 2
AfricanAmerican

Foster care household Urban

Family 3
Caucasian

Nuclear family

Suburban

Family 4
Caucasian

Nuclear family

Suburban

Family 5
LatinoAmerican
(Brazialian)
Family 6
Caucasian

Nuclear family

Suburban

adopted daughter
grandmother
foster mother
ex-husband
adopted daughter
foster child
foster child
adopted son
foster child
adopted daughter
mother
father
son
son
son

mother
father
son

Single mother

Suburban

mother
father
daughter
daughter
mother
son
son

twin son
twin daughter

45
46
8
3
85
61
64
21
17
14
13
4
2
51
47
19
16
8
43
47
10
47
59
17
14
33
10
8
6
6

Level of
education
Bachelor's degree
Bachelor's degree
Elementary school
Preschool
High school
Junior high
Elementary school
Elementary school
Elementary school
Elementary school
Elementary school
Preschool
Preschool
Master's degree
Master's degree
Elementary school
High school
Elementary school
Bachelor's degree
Bachelor's degree
Elementary school
Master's degree
Doctoral degree
High school
Junior high school
Associate degree
Elementary school
Elementary school
Kindergarten
Kindergarten

Disability
in family

Autism

Mental retardation
Cerebral palsy
Traumatic brain injury
ADD

Emotional disorder
Sickle-cell blood disease
Autism

Autism
Mild hearing loss
Profound hearing loss

Multiple disability
Multiple disability

198

Rieger
Table 2
Individual Participants' Contribution to the Data Collection Information

Families

Total

Individual
family members
mother
father
son
adopted daughter
grandmother
foster mother
ex-husband
adopted daughter
foster child
foster child
adopted son
foster child
adopted daughter
mother
father
son
son
son
mother
father
son
mother
father
daughter
daughter
mother
son
son
twin son
twin daughter
30

Observed

Interviewed
individually

Jointly
interviewed

20

15* (A family member could be

interviewed more than once)

-I-

30

Data Cottection
The data for this study were collected using two types
of activities. First, in-depth interviews were conducted.
Interviews were guided by an open-ended interview
protocol (Table 3). The interview protocol was used to
facilitate the first series of interviews rather than to
direct the interview (Creswell, 1994; Krueger, 1994).
Participants were encouraged to talk about their experiences with humor more freely during subsequent interviews, when the purpose was to clarify and elaborate
on the information previously shared by the participants. The interviews were conducted at the families'
homes and around their schedules. Booth and Booth
(1994, p. 30) suggest that "Good depth interviewing
means allowing the informant to feel in control." With
this in mind, the participants' home was used. In total,
35 interviews were conducted.
Interviews initially were discussed so they would be
conducted on a one-on-one basis to ensure privacy and
confidentiality (Sales & Folkman, 2002). At the request
of the families, however, some interviews involved
more than one family member (Maanen, 1988). Most of
these joint interviews included the family member with
disabilities and either a parent or another adult family

Table 3
Interview Protocol
1. What do you sense when you hear a word humor?
2. How would you define it?
3. Have you ever thought of yourself as having sense of
humor?
4. Why? Why not?
5. Can you recall some moments, stories, jokes or things
that made you and your family laugh?
6. What do you think was the role of these moments,
stories, jokes, and etc., in helping you to get through
embarrassing situations, major disappointments, fears
or upsets?
7. What do you think about your family-like a sense of
humor?
8. How do you feel when you are around people/family
members who make you laugh?
9. How do you feel about the experience of talking about
humor in the context of your family?
10. What connections do you make between humor and
disability?
11. Who initiates humorous interactions in context of
disability?
12. How do you draw boundaries between what is
'laughable' and what is not?
13. What are the functions of humor in your family's lives?
14. What are your individual preferences and perspectives
on humor?

Humor and Other Types of Fun

member. All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed. Transcriptions were accompanied by commentaries, which served as vehicles for the first microanalysis to reflect about the data collected (Rudestam &
Newton, 2001; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The commentaries were accompanied by frequent memos, which
discussed emerging questions for clarification; as such,
they allowed a constant comparative approach to data
analysis. In other words, coded categories were compared constantly with each other to get the bigger picture that emerged from the data and to ensure that the
emerging data were interpreted properly (Johnson &
Turner, 2003).
The second major data collection strategy involved
participant observation. Settings and activities during
which observations were conducted included shopping
trips, parent support meetings, schools or day care centers, lunch in the community, and family trips for leisure activities (e.g., amusement parks, museums, the
symphony, swimming, and dance calling). These shared
experiences provided opportunities to observe and
document the families' use of humor in settings different than their own households. In total, 30 observation
sessions were conducted in a period of 12 months. The
data from the observations were transcribed into field
notes. In total, 1,006 pages of notes were gathered both
from the interviews and the observations.
Trustworthiness of Findings
Several techniques were used to ensure the trustworthiness of the findings. First, the research was based on
contact over 12 months with the same group of people.
Second, a number of methods and sources were used to
triangulate information (Patton, 2002; Sales & Folkman, 2002; Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002). For example, participants were interviewed on a number of
occasions, issues from one interview were rephrased in
later interviews, interviews were conducted across family members, and observations were conducted so that
they reflected the real-world experiences of the participants. Third, the audiotapes were listened to and the
artifacts were examined numerous times. This repeated
exposure to the same data allowed multiple review of
the data, as a whole, for each family. Finally, a "thick"
description of context (Geertz, 1973; Wolcott, 2001)
was developed in the findings. This allowed participants
to speak for themselves with the help of a large number
of direct quotes, which are critical in qualitative research.

Results
Defining Humor
Families in this study had no one agreed-upon definition of humor. Rather, humor was seen in many ways
across and within families. For instance, they sometimes related humor to the experiences of smiling and

199

laughter. "When you smile and laugh, everybody smiles

and laughs. I take it as humor," said one foster care
mother. Within this understanding of humor, she called
her house the "Rainbow House" and talked about her
foster care children as humor producers, "good laughers" and as those with a light touch. She stated:
My two daughters grin all the time . . . and one son
is very outgoing. Everything is funny to these kids.
My other son, he smiles and when he smiles, he
radiates. I mean, he has a cleft mouth, but he
smiles anyway. He just beams . . . Another daughter will give us a giggle. She will go ha, ha, ha, ha,
ha and we get a really good giggle out of my last
At other times families defined humor in terms of
their day-to-day type of family fun. The mother of a
teenaged daughter with a profound hearing loss explained her understanding of humor most clearly when
she said:
Humor is about having fun. We see fun in more
everyday things and it is a huge list; we laugh at
each other, tease each other, and give ourselves
nicknames and laugh about it. We enjoy gardening,
listening to music, pottery, horseback riding, swimming, and sewing, and sharing laughter with
people. That's all humor. That's all fun.
At other times, families in this study talked about
humor in terms of its impact on their personal dispositions. In this sense families reported that having a sense
of humor is directly linked to their sense of happiness.
"'Humor' and 'happy' both start with the letter 'h,'"
commented the father of a son with autism. The mother
of twins with multiple disabilities shared his point of
view when she argued, "Humor is that mixed emotion
that creates goose bumps in your body and heightens
really happy situations and humorous incidents in a
family." Thus happy family moments are central to the
families' descriptions of humor. This is evident in another mother's words, who sees through the eyes of her
son happy family times:
I find humor through the eyes of a happy childI
mean, for me, seeing my son jumping up and down
just so excited. Yesterday watching those Orca
whales and then getting totally splashed, I mean
the delight in that, and then having him get back in
the car and keep talking about it all the way home,
hugging his fuzzy Orca whale, and he and the kids
sort of bopping each other over the heads and giggling. My daughter was giggling in the back seat of
the car last night. That is a precious moment.
That's humor. That's fun. That means everything
to me.

200

Rieger

Finally, some families offered their understanding of

humor by linking it with the phenomenon called laughter. The mother of a child with autism illustrated the
point most clearly when she pondered the varied types
of laughter and created a taxonomy of the fun, the
funny, and the laughter:
I see humor mainly through the lenses of laughter
and what's funny. However, there are different
kinds of laughter, and also different theories of
funny. Like it could be funny to make you laugh or
funny just interesting or funny odd. And laughter
can be acquiescence for somebody or it can be
embarrassment... Fun is English dancing. [Fun is]
something that happened and made us just burst
out laughing and then, afterwards, boy, that felt
good. It is different than other kinds of laughter.
When you are surprised by something and it is
amusing and just funny, that is a different kind of
laughter than maybe mild jokes, or just smiling
because you are saying hi to somebody.
Functions of Humor
Participants described nine different functions of humor (Table 4). Each of these is described in the following sections.
Humor as a Means of Reteasing Negative Emotions
and as a Natural Stress Remedy
Some families used humor as an "inner safety button" that allowed them to release tension, dispel worry.

and relax. One mother of a son with autism stated,

"Humor helps me to diffuse embarrassment, frustration, and anger. It also allows me to relax and move
on." A father of a child with autism said, "When you
are very tense on your job or with your family, it's
important to express your feelings and not to swallow
them up." Whenever this happened, this father would
play his favorite computer games or listen to good music to restore equilibrium to his body and mind. He
meant all of this when he said, "If a day is hard at work,
I come home and just play computer games. You know,
bang, bang! [laughing] Now I can deal with the world
again." He literally would laugh himself back to health.
The mother of a teenaged daughter with a profound
hearing loss used humor as a weapon against moods.
She noted that if she started her day off with a laugh,
she was able to fight her emotional burnout through the
rest of the day and help others be more productive. She
said, "I use humor to facilitate a day, initiate interactions, to encourage others to do some challenging tasks,
and not to be burned out before the day is over."
According to another mother, humor is most of all a
great tool in fighting negative and aggressive behaviors
coming from her own loved ones. For instance, one day
her son with multiple disabilities pulled the Christmas
tree down and trashed it in two minutes. Although she
was angry at her son's behavior, she decided to respond
with humor:
I started to giggle and make eye contact with him.

Tahle 4
Summary of the Families' Function of Humor
Function
Humor as a means of releasing negative emotions
and a natural stress remedy
Humor as a means of learning
Humor as a form of problem solving
Humor as a means of connecting
Humor as a form of communication

Humor as a means of preventing others from

engaging in a putdown

Humor as an expression of freedom

Humor as a means of building optimistic thinking
Humor as a form of discovering a playful spirit in
oneself

Definition
To release tension, dispel worry, and relax
To modify moods
To fight negative and aggressive behaviors
To teach functional skills
To teach good manners and mathematics
To talk about things that bother you
To cook pork chops
To solve children's conflicts
To create a bond among family members
To connect with other families having children with
disabilities
To tease each other about daily matters
To laugh with family members with disabilities
To laugh around disability
To create positive humor
To laugh about not-so-funny things
To keep others from laughing at you
To deal with disabilities and increase resilience and coping
mechanisms of children with disabilities
To improve self-esteem
To experience freedom from embodied social constraints and
experiences
To feel in control and secure
To promote positive experiences
To gain a perspective on what really matters in life
To deal with family mishaps
To act silly and be goofy
To discover your inner playfulness

Humor and Other Types of Fun

At the same time, I tried to calm him down. I said

to him, "You need to calm down, honey," and I
continued to giggle. As much as he seemed to be
surprised at my laughter, it worked. He stared at
me very intensely for a few seconds and then he
burst into hearty laughter. He was chanting, "You
are silly. Mommy." I gave him a big hug and he
returned the hug.
In a later conversation about this incident, this
mother explained the rationale for her behavior:
I think it is a self-preservation thing: you know, if
I don't crack up I'm going to burst into tears. I
know that if I do that, everything is just going to go
right downhill. So I need to laugh to deal with that
kind of stress, to relax, get balance, and forget
about the bad stuff.
Thus one of the reasons for the families' use of humor is to triumph over their negative emotional experiencesto let off steam and achieve victory over everyday mishaps.
Humor as a Means of Learning
Families reported that laughter (e.g., ha ha!) and
learning (e.g., aha!) sometimes go hand in hand. For
instance, one mother was thrilled when her son with
autism learned to ride a bicycle. She reported that she
had exposed her son to a cartoon character to teach him
how to ride. As she pointed to the picture of her son on
a bicycle, she explained:
My son is learning to ride a two-wheeler. How we
did that is through a wonderful videotape called
"D.W. Rides Again!" where D.W. is a little cartoon character and his big brother is Arthur who is
going into third grade, and D.W. is learning to ride
the two-wheeler. So my strategy was to tell my son,
"Look, you want to be a big brother, you've got to
learn how to ride the two-wheeler bike because
you wouldn't want your younger sister to be learning how to ride the two-wheeler before you."
Forty-five minutes later he was outside with his
father and he was riding a two-wheeler. He rides it
like a pro now [laughing].
Another mother made it a point to teach her foster
children good manners with the help of a smile, and
also focused on when laughing was not a good thing.
She noted that a lot of the children that were coming to
her "Rainbow" household were eager to pick on other
people and laugh at them. That is something that was
not acceptable in her home:
I teach them not to laugh at people. That would
defeat what we are doing in this house, if they did
that. We don't allow them to pick on people, and
we show them why it is better to be nice and smile

201

than to be nasty. They learn that as a ground rule

when they come in here.
One father (who has a mild hearing loss) used teasing
combined with token economy to increase his daughter's understanding of mathematical concepts:
I tease my daughter who has a disability a lot. For
example, I pay her $10 to teach me math. In that
way I can see her weaknesses because I'm good in
mathematics; that's my field. It is not how smart
you are but what you do with what you have. So I
use humor to help my daughter understand mathematics, and she loves that.
Humor as a Form of Probtem Sotving
The families in this study used humor at home to
make parenthood not only enjoyable, but also to open
doors to problem-solving in a fun and creative way. For
instance, one mother described how a humorous approach revealed new insights and solutions to her problems raising teenage daughters:
Humor is a problem-solving tool. For example, if
my daughter has forgotten to call me and went to
her friend's house, to be frank, I'm a little upset. I
could choose that avenue or I could choose a little
humorous side of it: "Oh, great, I see you now!
Maybe I will give you my phone number and you
can carry it with you, only in case you need it." [I
use] a httle bit of irony because she picks up on the
humor and the message. I think humor is the best
way to talk about the things that bother you. I
believe that things happen to people, but you still
have a choice of how you look at it. I choose to use
the hghter side of it, because I see humor as an
alternative solution to my problems.
In a similar creative problem-solving tone, one set of
parents who have a child with autism found a perfect
way to cook pork chops underneath the broiler. The
only way they know when the pork chops are done,
however, is when the smoke alarm goes off. They explained that culinary secret with hearty laughter, saying:
The smoke alarm is right outside the kitchen door,
and it is a perfect pork chop timer. You just put the
pork chops in the oven and turn on the broiler.
When the smoke alarm goes off [laughter] you turn
them over, and then you wait until it goes off again
[laughter]. That's the sign that they are perfectly
done. They are excellent: crisp on the outside and
juicy on the inside [laughter].
On the other hand, one mother applied humor to
solve some of the age-related conflicts between her foster children:

202

The main war in this house is between the 9- and

the 14-year-old. The 9-year-old thinks he is 14 and
the 14-year-old thinks he is 41 [laughing], so I'm a
constant referee. 1 referee fights, and I'm a doctor,
and a nurse, and a lawyer, and a judge that passes
the sentence, and I'm a comedian, too. You name
it. I will do everything to keep the peace. We talk
and we laugh to get through it. Then we laugh
again about it. So the rule of the game in this house
is to laugh, not to fight.
All these family members demonstrated an ability to
look beyond the obvious, to see relationships in unusual and new ways, and to be open and flexible, and
they frequently chose to express themselves through
artistic and playful humor directed at their specific audiencetheir family.
Humor as a Means of Connecting
Families in this study talked about humor as a means
of connecting. For instance, laughing together at the
same joke that the family has known for a long time
formed an immediate bond among one family that included a member with autism. Consider first the joke, a
favorite of their son with autism, and then the parents'
commentary on the joke:
There are three escaped prisoners, and their names
are Wilson, Clancy, and Schwartz. They all get
caught and are to be punished witb three lashes
each, but they are allowed to put anything they
want on their back first. When asked, Wilson says,
"On my back I want some oil." So they put oil on
his back and then they whip him. "Ow," he says.
"That hurts." When he is asked, Clancy says,
"Nothing. Whip away." So okay, tough guy, here
you go. Clancy says, "That is one. That is two. That
is three." When Schwartz is asked what he wanted
on his back, Schwartz says, "On my back I want
Clancy." [Laughter]
We would tell this joke in our family. In a certain
situation we might just say, "Nothing! Whip
away!" [laugh] or "I want Clancy!" Any of those
things could just be brought out. Because that is
part of our culture. We all know that joke. So as a
family can connect on some level [by using it]. It is
part of our family; we would know what we were
talking about because we knew the joke.
The families also mentioned that connecting might
be extended to a much broader community than a
single family. For example, one mother was a founder
and leader of an autism support group for many years.
During that time, she developed the habit of doing 10
minutes of stand-up comedy to help families connect
with one another. As she noted, the members of the
group were not the easiest people with whom to connect: they came from different backgrounds and were

Rieger

at different stages of coping with disability. Yet she says

it was humor that helped them not to feel alone:
When I am standing up in front of the autism support group and I give about 10 minutes of a comedy routine. These are people that are all experiencing a lot of the same things we are, but they are
coming from different places. Some of them have
just found out their child's diagnosis and some of
them have lived with it a longer time than we have.
But it helps to take circumstances that are typical
for them in their families, and explain it in reference to my family and, again, show the humor. I'm
not trying to put down the seriousness, make light
of things that are very important, but sometimes by
putting them in the humorous anecdote that has
happened in my family, it makes it easier for somebody else to go through that experience and know
what it is going to be like for them. "OK, yes, I
know it. I don't feel alone now. I understand."
Similarly, a foster care parent used humor to connect
with other families that had children with disabilities.
She considered it a personal challenge to see if she
could get somebody with a lot of tumultuous feelings,
confused thought, or anger to smile. If she was successful, she defined that success in terms of bonding:
I'm a parent partner and I work with parents who
have children in crisis that have done bad things.
They are disgusted; they don't smile; they have just
had it up to here [raising her hand above her head].
I like them because then I have to get a smile back
on that face. Last night I got a smile from one
person; I got her. We bonded together, and I'm
going to be her parent partner.
Humor as a Form of Communication
Families in this study used teasing as a daily style of
communication. The most common type of family teasing involved both the speaker and the listener making
teasing commentaries. The teasing conversation often
reflected a joking relationship that was focused on the
people involved. Consider this teasing exchange between one mother and her teenaged daughter without
disability:
Mother: You know, [this researcher] is doing a
study and it is on families, etc. So she asked me
what my strengths were.
Daughter: You don't have any [laughing].
Mother: [laugh] Ah, you don't think I have any?
Daughter: Nope [laughing].
Mother: See, I was painting a much better picture
for her. You don't think so?

Humor and Other Types of Fun

Daughter: No, I just didn't want to answer the

question [laughing].
By asking her daughter about her personal strengths,
this mother invited her daughter's teasing. Their teasing took the form of a topical conversation, which included commentaries and both serious and lighthearted
qualities. It was also a form of "permissible disrespect"
between two persons to tease, who in turn are expected
not to take offense.
The families' teasing, however, differed according to
whether the recipient was a child with or without a
disability. Teasing commentaries that were directed toward children with disabilities appeared to be marked
by contextual cues (e.g., laughter or repeated questioning to aid the child's perception of the commentary as
light rather than serious). In fact, teasing directed toward children with disabilities tended to take tbe form
of an invitation to tease. With statements like "Let's
tease," "That's only teasing," or "We are teasing you,"
adult family members set the tone for playful rather
than hostile exchanges. Consider this teasing exchange
among the members of one family:
Father: Everything my son with autism reads and
sees is recorded. And then he plays it back to us
after he's seen it all.
Mother: [turning to her son] Right? You play back
everything [laughter].
Son: I don't remember that [laughing].
Mother: He's teasing you. Sometimes you do that,
though, you start in the middle of your tape and I
don't know what you're talking about.
Father: And there's no rewind. Fast forward only
[laughing].
Son: Oh [laughing].
Mother: Yes, it does have a rewind. It goes all the
way back to the beginning and starts over again
[laugbing].
Thus, the families' use of teasing reflected the difference between the popular use of the verb "to tease"
and its more technical definitions. Dictionary definitions place emphasis on the hostile or destructive components of the teasing act. According to Stein and
Flexner (1984, p. 714), to tease means "to taunt, ridicule, mock, vex, harass or torment." The use of teasing
by the families in this study seemed to stand somewhere
between love and gentle criticism, friendliness and
lighthearted playfulness. The father of a child with autism noted, "Those who love each other tease each
other." "This is all in good fun," commented another
parent of a child with autism. But perhaps the mother

203

of a daughter with a profound hearing impairment articulated most clearly the principle of using humor
when she said, "Either they [individuals with disabilities] are part of the humor, or there is no point in doing
it."
Humor as a Means of Preventing Ottiers From
Engaging in a Putdown
The families believed that the qualities you might not
particularly like about yourself or situations you perceive as disadvantageous become less uncomfortable
when you can laugh at them before others laugh at
them. For instance, a foster care parent stated, "I laugh
at myself, and I laugh at myself to keep you from laughing at me." Another mother echoed this sentiment
when she said, "I think that it is important to be able to
laugh at yourself. You have to laugh at yourself when
you have a child with special needs."
Interestingly, families in this study saw the need to
talk about disability and their own process of gradual
acceptance of disability as a step forward in their ability
to laugh more freely about it, thus preventing others
from laughing at them. More specifically, families in
this study did not believe that their children's disabilities always needed to be considered a serious matter.
One family member stated, "It is the time and the manner which are decisive factors, not the subject of humor
itself." Families described how, as they moved toward
acceptance of a family member having a disability, they
began to see more and more the absurdity and humor
of the same disability-related situations about which
they used to be very sensitive. The mother of a child
with autism described one of her bedtime conversations
with her husband. Lying in bed, she realized that she
had not locked the back door and that somebody could
kidnap her disabled son. Here is her recollection of that
conversation:
I said to him, "Did you lock the back door?" He
said, "No, I don't know." I said, "Well, will you
check?" He said, "Why?" I said, getting more and
more concerned, "Our son is back there!" He
rolled over and said, "So what?" I said, "So someone can come in and steal him!" He turned over
and grunted, "But they will bring him back!" We
both got into laughter as we realized that we were
poking fun at ourselves because we know the situation. Who would want to steal a child with a disability? [laughing]
Humor helped the families deal with disabilities by
looking straight at them and laughing. Families felt that
being serious about disabilities all of the time would be
destructive. As one foster care parent said, "If 1 didn't
have a sense of humor, I would have been dead a long
time ago [laughing]. Because if you cannot laugh at
yourself and laugh at things through life, you're not
going to make it. That's how I feel."

204

Rieger

Families made a distinction between laughing at

yourself and putting yourself down. The mother of a
child with autism noted, "Putting yourself down can
undermine your self-esteem and make you and those
around you uncomfortable." Similarly, the mother of
twins with multiple disabilities said, "Laughing at yourself first gives you an opportunity to acknowledge the
situation in a way that eases it and may even improve
your self-esteem and respect." Moreover, as a father of
a son with autism noted, "Humor helps you recognize
that you are not the center of the universe. When you
make a mistake, the rest of the world generally does not
care. So just accept it and move on." Thus the use of
humor by the families in this study served as a tool
whose main function was not to destroy one's selfimage, but to provide a vehicle to criticize and reveal
mistakes, yet save face in the process of selfactualization.
Unfortunately, a lot of self-directed humor seemed
to represent the families' ways of dealing with what
they saw as the "disgusting aspects of being stigmatized" as a result of having a family member with a
disability. Another mother of two children with multiple disabilities noted:

noted, there were times that some of her family members' "little habits" drove her nuts. Whenever this happened, she used cartoon characters to poke fun at them
and thus free herself from the expectations to be a "perfect" family. She said:

I think [humor] is important because I realize,

even as hurtful as it is, there are going to be people
that laugh at my children, and I know people are
cruel. There are people in this world tbat are just
like that. So I feel that, if I can get them used to
laughing at themselvesbut not ever saying that I
want it done in a cruel waybut if I get them used
to that, then maybe when it happens [with nonfamily members], it won't be as traumatic, or
maybe they will feel like, "Hey, maybe they are
laughing with me and not at me." So I think it kind
of prepares them.

Another mother of a son with autism admitted that

she is often expected by her family members to prepare
great meals. When she succeeded she took the credit,
but at times when she failed she applied some selfdirected humor to rise above them:

Humor as an Expression of Freedom

The ability to laugh at your own flaws, weaknesses,
and blunders was recognized and used by the families in
this study as a liberating strategy. Specifically, the families claimed that it was possible to free themselves with
the help of humor from the constraints imposed by
daily activities related to raising a child with disability,
or from the constraints imposed by other family members' or society's expectations in general. According to
these families, such freedom sets for them a more relaxed atmosphere when dealing with individual failures
either within the family unit or in public settings. "Grocery melt-downs, "restaurant mishaps," or the "comedy
of undress incidents," when seen in this light, need not
be accompanied by embarrassment or other negative
feelings. In other words, families can respond to these
situations with humor; they can let themselves off the
hook for their own good. One mother of a son with
autism claimed to love her family dearly but, as she

When I am really sick of all of us, I have this vision

of us as Gary Larsen cartoon characters, all getting
on a plane together, and going to New York City,
and getting stuck there with something happening,
so that you are all stuck in the middle of New York
City and can't leave. My mother tries to figure out
where we are, and my sister stands there panhandling, and my son cries out at the top of his
lungs because he doesn't want to stand anywhere
near his aunt, and my daughter tries to ask her aunt
to make sure she gets her toenails painted red next
time, or blue, or whatever color, and my mother
keeps calling me and asking, "Where are we?" My
husband, of course, is still driving around because
he can't find a parking space that is close enough to
where he wants to be. So he just keeps driving
around for 25 minutes because eventually a parking space will open up [laugh].

I remember this one bread that I made. By the

time I was done raising everything and baking it, it
had taken me seven hours. And when I took it out
of the oven, I had two bricks [laughing]. Actually,
it was the worst bread I ever made [laughing
loudly]. You know, I had my mouth all set for
homemade bread . . . not that day [laughing]!
In each of these examples the families used selfdirected humor to experience freedom from perceived
socially constraining situations. Even though their individual vulnerabilities were different, they all laughed at
the all-too-human side of themselves, and they got the
upper hand in these situations by being the first to poke
fun. By being able to laugh at themselves and their
predicaments, they displayed a picture of themselves as
people with a positive self-concept and as masters of
their own fate. Their laughter was the product of a
feeling of security and control and thus an expression of
freedom.
Humor as a Means of Buitding Optimistic Thinking
The families in this study also related their experiences of humor with basic notions of optimism. The
families presented themselves as generally upbeat,
happy, and cheerful people. Consider the following ex-

Humor and Other Types of Fun

cerpt illustrating the optimism of one mother of a child

with autism:
You should make humor one of the commandments. You know? Thou shall always laugh, or
something like that. Or if you had to add to your
Internal Revenue tax return 10 jokes [laugh], that
is, 10 jokes along with the tax return maybe, and
without having 10 original jokes they wouldn't accept your tax return and you would be penalized.
You would have to be more optimistic.
A foster care parent believed that you could alter
your attitude by making small changes in your physical
appearance and immediate environment. She would
change her hairdo, surround herself with flowers, or be
on the lookout for sunshine. All of these efforts were
undertaken to accentuate the positive rather than the
negative, for herself and her foster children. She illustrated her point in the following way:
When you smile and laugh, everybody smiles and
laughs. So I perceive it as humor, sunshine, flowers, nice pretty things, bright colors. I wear bright
colors in the wintertime. We don't wear dull stuff.
I'll get my hair done, I'll go buy a new hat, I buy a
new outfit, go out to eat, do something to make me
feel humorous. In doing that, I make somebody
else feel good because I'm always doing jokes and
good jokes...like I plan when the kids come home
to do something to make them laugh if they had a
hard day or if they are having a bad time. I make
them feel good about themselves, talk about something good, get animals, talk about animals. You
know, things like that. We don't have time to really
feel sad too long here. We just don't.
Similarly, a mother whose son has autism suggested
that if you wear "positive attitude glasses" once in a
while, things seem brighter, better, and even more practical. She said:
My son is very direct and obsessive in his questions. He asks what he wants to ask: "Who are
you? What is your name again?" Over and over
again. So I often use him in these social situations
where I'm not quite sure of people's names, and I
need to talk to them. I just make sure I'm near my
son, because he will ask, "What is your name
again?" [laugh].
Thus, with this optimistic outlook, families tended to
acknowledge the fact that humor provides perspective.
Specifically, according to them all that matters is how
far you can look ahead in the future and how creative
you can be to deal with temporary family mishaps. A
mother of a son with autism gave this example of how
far a family's imagination can go to provide optimism:

205

Is this really going to matter to you in 10 years, if

you are still here? And what really is going to matter in 10 years? So I have really learned [sigh], so
much that [happened] in various stages of my life
[was not foreseen]. You know [the question],
"What do you see yourself doing in five years?'"
Well now, that is such a joke to me. I have no idea.
I'll probably still be scrubbing that same toilet with
that same toilet brush because my son doesn't
know how to aim yet [laugh]. That is what I am
going to be doing. But in the perspective of what is
important for promotional purposes or life goals,
I'm thinking of things more in terms of, well,
maybe we'll all get to Disney World by five years
from now. Or, gee, when I'm in my 70s and still
hopeful that Pll be healthy enough and maybe
have enough money that I'll be able to have this
cute home health aide, this hunky guy named
Omar who can wheel me around and I can show
off this pretty boy to my lady friends, you know
[laugh]: "Omar, come here, I need tea" [laugh].
Humor as a Form of Discovering a Ptayfut Spirit
in Onesetf
The families' use of playfulness held particular appeal for the children with disabilities who responded
gleefully in all kinds of emotional climates, and on a
variety of occasions. Sometimes they might simply
smile, like one child with autism did when he received
an unexpected new CD from his father. At other times
they displayed a discreet chuckle when being caught at
an inopportune moment, like one teenager with a profound hearing loss who was caught by her mother still
in pajamas in the middle of the day. When asked by her
mother, "Could you tell me why you are still in your
pajamas?" she said nothing, but chuckled with deeppitched laughter. If something was really hilarious,
some of the children expressed themselves through
whole body movement. In such cases, they moved back
and forth, slapped themselves, stomped on the floor, or
even hit, leaned on, or hugged the people near them.
One child with autism did all of that when he watched
the musical "Little Red Riding Hood" at a concert hall.
Although playfulness held particular appeal for the
children, the appreciation of this less sophisticated form
of humor was not lost with age. Most of the parents
related to what they termed "playful interactive humor." More precisely, they made eye contact and made
faces with family members. For example, the father of
a son with autism stuck his tongue out and said, "My
tongue is stuck out here! I don't know what to do about
it. Help!" Sometimes parents produced a life caricature
of the very behaviors they were modeling and demanding from their children, drawing attention to themselves
as awkward but lovable clowns. The mother of twins
with multiple disabilities did that when she made a collage of mashed potatoes, smashed peas, and squashed

206

Rieger

carrots on her dinner plate and swept this creation onto

the floor with one grand gesture, "Food can be played
with, not only eaten."
Thus parents expressed their perception of playfulness by acting silly. They tended to operationalize their
silly feelings by fooling around or being goofy, and the
ordinary rules of behavior were temporarily suspended.
The parent of a child with autism described the appropriate times to cut loose and act foolishly. She reported
that whenever her children were caught in bad moods
she would "get goofy" to move them out of their negative attitudes. If they asked for a particular toy she
would purposefully bring something else and ask, "Is
this what you want?" Hearing the children's negative
response, "No!" She then would say, "Well, the witch
puppet will help," and she would bring a puppet with
the toy that the children had asked for in the first place.
With such a violation of the conventions governing a
mother's serious behavior, both she and the children
could not help but burst into silly laughter. In other
words, it was both the foolishness and the calculations
of reason that made it possible sometimes to redirect
potentially negative behavior and create instead enjoyable family moments.
Finally, the families in this study demonstrated playfulness in their ability to discover their "inner child."
The father of an autistic child illustrated this concept
when he noted:
I'm a little kid too. I like to have fun. I try to go to
places that my son likes and also that I like. Neither of us like to play Little League baseball, so we
go to amusement parks and have fun together. To
give you an example, we'll go in the gate and he'll
start to run and I'll run right behind him to get to
the first ride. So, I guess the engineer [i.e., professional persona] leaves me a little bit... and I act
more like a kid.

Discussion
The exploration of humor has shown it to be a highly
important phenomenon among the families in this
study. The families enjoyed and engaged in a broad
spectrum of humor-related events and behaviors. Humor manifested itself as everything from a quiet seraphic smile to raucous laughter. Indeed, humor was an
integral part of their daily lives. The families shared
precious moments in which humor solidified them as a
family.
Furthermore, families in this study demonstrated a
situational and functional approach to humor. They put
special emphasis on what humor did for them and those
around them, especially in moments of stress and when
they experienced negative emotions. They gave examples of how to learn to solve problems with a bit of
a sense of humor. They appreciated the great value of
humor as a communication tool and as a way of con-

necting with each other. They discovered a playful

spirit in themselves and developed an optimistic outlook about everything that was happening to them.
They even learned how to laugh at themselves through
all the not-so-funny life events. Thus, the families' sense
of humor dealt with everything that was real and authentic and most of all everything human within their
immediate family realities. The physical act of laughing
and smiling seemed to take on a special meaning in
these family members' daily humorous interactions. It
was as though their ability to laugh, like their ability to
speak, was innate, but they learned their own particular
culture of doing it: singing in a goofy way, being crazy
with their children, tickling them, playing in mock
roughness with them, or just kissing and hugging.
Gutwirth (1993) labeled such an understanding of humor "functionalistic," as "in one way or another these
accounts integrate laughter in a large human enterprise" (p. 2). The families' "functionalistic" approach to
humor also is consistent with the literature on family
adjustment and therapy (Rehill, 1990; Riegner, 1996),
as well as the medical (Lingon, 1996; Rapaport & Gibson, 1993; Robinson, 1977) and workforce research
(Bond, 1998; Braverman, 1993; Hulse, 1994; Lea, 1998;
McCrone, 2000), which associates humor with many
healthy individual outcomes.
The use of humor by these families also opposes the
widespread perceptions that being a parent of or a family member living with a child with a disability is, on
average, a negative and a sorrowful experience. Reactions ranging from tension headaches to demoralization
at the individual level, and from divorce to abuse or
neglect at the family level, are linked to living with a
relative with a disability (Singer & Irvin, 1989). In some
extreme cases the experience of a disability has been
viewed as analogous to a death in the family. This interpretation holds tbat the expected "normal" child has
been lost through the birth of a child with disabilities,
thus postulating tbat the family must constantly work
through a grieving process (Drotar, Baskiewicz, Irvin,
Kennell, & Klaus, 1975; Seligman & Darling, 1989).
Needless to say, in such family portraits there is no
room left for a role for humor in the context of disability. On the contrary, "terminal seriousness" took the
lead (Singer & Irvin, 1989). The families in this study
illustrated, through a functional approach to humor,
that having a family member with disabilities did not
stop them from having fun and sharing humor. On the
contrary, they used humor as an effective coping strategy to deal with disability. In other words, even when
these families took their responsibilities seriously, they
tried not to take themselves too seriously. The use of
humor helped them to do this.
As a result, tbe families were able to construct a
sense of ordinary lives by simply doing tbe things that
other families do. Specifically, the parents in tbis study,
like other parents, viewed their children with disabili-

207

Humor and Other Types of Futi

ties as children first; they did not refer to them by their

disability labels. Rather, tbey were playful with their
children, teased them, and recognized their potential
for humor and sense of fun. Home, as this study suggests, might be a natural environment for exposing children with disabilities to spontaneous humor and teaching them to understand things by using humor; that is,
when they are exposed to humor, tbey have a good
chance of learning about humor and using it themselves
(Jarzab, 1997).
Finally, the families in this study showed that functional humor was not something neatly wrapped up and
given as a sort of gift for living; rather, they showed that
they had to cultivate it on their own. They scheduled
tbe habit of laughing witb others in their daily lives, and
to achieve that goal, they became "amateur humorists"
because, as Ziv (1984) noted, "A humorist is a person
who creates humor, either professionally or only occasionally 'an amateur'" (p. xii). An ability to free themselves from uncomfortable social situations (Koestler,
1964; Mindess, 1971) and to discover their inner clown
went hand in hand with the cultivation of humor. It was
Wooten (1996) who in her studies on playful humor
among adults with health problems described so eloquently tbat very ability: "Each of us has a little clown
inside us waiting to pop out and express itself in a funny
way. By finding your own inner clown, tbe fool in yourself, you can learn to play witb life and joke about
anything and everything" (p. 138). Domhoff (cited in
McGhee & Goldstein, 1983) described such humor cultivation practice as "banana time," the experience of
laughing together. This experience can be meaningless
unless one has been a part of a group culture and this
group has been in existence for some time. Applied to
this research, the families represented a unique group
culture as they shared their insider culture, defining
humorous situations as their "happy family moments."
Limitations
The findings from this study and their interpretations
must be considered in light of the study's limitations.
Specifically, tbere are several reasons why there are
limitations in the extent to wbich findings from this
study can be generalized. First, the selection of families
might place some boundaries on the study. Most of the
families in this study were identified through referral
from professionals. One of the problems with this kind
of referral is that when professionals are asked to recommend parents who might be interested in participating in a study, tbey may interpret that to mean parents
with whom they have had positive experiences or parents who might be considered to be articulate. Attempts were made to circumvent this issue by giving the
families time to think seriously about the study before
they made a commitment to participate and by assuring
them that their lack of participation would not have any
effect on their relationships witb the professionals who

recommended them. However, tbe fact that tbe referring professionals might have excluded families who
were less articulate or less open cannot be ignored. As
such, these families cannot be considered representative of families everywhere.
Second, tbe families who chose to participate in this
study had a strong ideological stance toward inclusion.
Moreover, they were people who had reached a level of
comfort with having a family member with disabilities
and had made efforts to move beyond them. These
factors might have given the families in this study a
stronger predisposition to engage themselves in humorous interactions, as well as to engage in this kind of
research.
Finally, most family members in this study were
highly educated, had varied interests, and led financially secure lives. Families who are more economically
vulnerable might have contrasting interests and family
relationships and less stable resource bases. Thus, tbey
might have perspectives on the matter of humor varying from those of the families in this study.
Suggestions for Further Research
Further investigations of functional humor within
families that have a member with disabilities need to be
conducted. For instance, the views of children with disabilities should be further solicited whenever feasible to
include their voices more actively. In this study, attempts were made to include the perspectives of all
family members; in retrospect, however, it is clear tbat
most of the humor accounts came from the parents.
These represent adult perspectives. It is necessary in
future researcb, therefore, to study more directly tbe
perceptions of cbildren witb disabilities and tbeir understanding of the role of humor within tbeir lives.
Research is also needed on families' perceptions of
humor across their life cycles, since families of children
with disabilities change over time. Just as individuals
develop and change through different phases of life, so
might the families and the role of humor in them. At
every stage of life, family members have different tasks
to accomplish and different needs to be fulfilled. For
example, in the first stage of forming a couple, two
individuals need to build a relationship and to learn to
live together. The arrival of a child with a disability
must cbange these patterns of interactions. Later in life,
when cbildren are going to school and then leaving
home, parents must adapt to these changes and adjust
their sense of humor. Further research would allow us
to follow such families to answer questions such as (a)
when does humor emerge in families? and (b) do families change or experience differently tbeir senses of humor over time?

References
Albrecht, G. L. (1999). Disability humor: What's in a joke?
Body and Society, 5(4), 67-.74.

208

Rieger

Anderson, P. M. (1988). American humor, handicapism, and

censorship. Journal of Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities International, 4, 79-87.
Baum, R. B. (1998), Humor and disability. The Bridge, 8(4),
3-6.
Bogdan, R. (1988). Freak show: Presenting human oddities for
amusement and profit. Chicago: The University of Chicago
Press.
Bond, J. F. (1998). Take two guffaws and call me in the morning! Incentive, 172(2), 48^9.
Booth, T., & Booth, W. (1994). Parenting under pressure:
Mothers and fathers with learning difficulties. Buckingham:
Open University Press.
Braverman, T. (1993). Enhance your sense of self-mirth: Funin-the workplace philosophies keep firms laughing all the
way to the bank. Training & Development, 47(7), 9-11.
Breslau, N., & Davis, D. C. (1986), Chronic stress and major
depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 43, 309-314,
Brooks, N, A,, Guthrie, D. W., & Gaylord, C. G. (1999),
Therapeutic humor in the family: An exploratory study. International Journal of Humor Research, 72(2), 151-160.
Burbach, H, J., & Babbitt, Ch. E. (1993, January/February/
March), An exploration of the social functions of humor
among college students in wheelchairs. Journal of Rehabilitation, 12, 6-9,
Cassell, J, L, (1985), Disabled humor: Origin and impact, JoMrnal of Rehabilitation, 10, 59-62,
Chapman, A, H,, & Chapman-Santana, M, (1995), The use of
humor in psychotherapy, Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria,
55(1), 153-156,
Chapman, A, J, (1976), Social aspects of humorous laughter.
In A, J, Chapman & H, C, Foot (Eds,), Humor and laughter:
Theory, research and applications. Chichester, England:
Wiley,
Christie, G, L, (1994), Some psychological aspects of humor.
International Journal of Psycho-Anatysis, 75(3), 479^89,
Creswell, J, W, (1994), Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,
Davidson, E, F, W, K,, Woodill, G,, & Bredberg, E, (1994),
Images of disability in 19th-century British children's literature. Disability and Society, 9(1), 33~46,
DeVault, M, J, (1991), Feeding the family: The social organization of caring as gendered work. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press,
Dixon, N, F, (1980), Humor: A cognitive alternative to stress?
In I, G, Sarason & C, D, Spielberger (Eds,), Stress and anxiety, Vol, 7, Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing,
Drotar, D,, Baskiewicz, B, A,, Irvin, N,, Kennell, J,, & Klaus,
M, E, (1975), The adaptation of parents to the birth of an
infant with a congenital malformation: A hypothetical
model. Pediatrics, 56, 710-717,
Foot, H, C, Chapman, A, J,, & Smith, J, R, (1980), Patterns of
interaction in children's friendships. In H, C, Foot, A, J,
Chapman, & J, R, Smith (Eds,), Friendship and social relations in children. England: Wiley,
Francisco, S, M, (1989), Roy's modes of adaptation and use of
humor related to family functioning. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. University of Pittsburgh,
Fry, F, W,, Jr, (1963), Sweet madness: A study of humor. Palo
Alto, CA: Pacific Books,
Geertz, C, (1973), Thick description. In C, Geertz (Ed,), The
interpretation of cultures (pp, 3-30), New York: Basic
Books,
Gutwirth, M, (1993), Laughing matter: An essay on the comic.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press,
Hampes, W, P, (1992), Relationship between intimacy and
humor. Psychological Reports, 71, 127-130,
Hampes, W, P, (1999), The relationship between humor and
trust. International Journal of Humor Research, 12, 253-259,

Hertzler, J, O, (1970), Laughter: A socio-scientific analysis.

New York: Exposition Press,
Hulse, J, R, (1994), Humor: A nursing intervention for the
elderly. Geriatric Nursing, 15(2), 88-90,
Jarzab, A, (1997), Family perspectives on humor. Unpublished
research apprenticeship paper, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY,
Jarzab, A, (2004), Attack it with humor and make it as wonderful as you can. Exceptional Parent, 34(4), 38-40,
Johnson, B,, & Turner, L, A, (2003), Data collection strategies
in mixed methods research. In A, Tasshakkori & C, Taddlie
(Eds,), Handbook of mixed methods research. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage,
Kirsh, G, A,, & Kuiper, N, A, (2003), Positive and negative
aspects of humor: Associations with the constructs of individualism and relatedness. International Journal of Humor
Research, 16, 33-62,
Koestler, A, (1964), The act of creation. London: Hutchinson,
Krueger, R, R, (1994), Focus: A practical guide for applied
research (2d ed,), Newbury Park, CA: Sage,
Lazarus, R,, & Folkman, S, (1984), Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer-Verlag,
Lea, N, (1998), Laughing matters: In today's stressful working
environment, humor is vital, Canadian Consulting Engineer,
39(2), 53-54,
Lingon, J, (1996), Using the surprise task in family therapy.
Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 7(1), 55-58,
Lipman, S, (1991), Laughter in Hell: The use of humor during
the Holocaust. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson Ine,
Livneh, H, (1980), Disability and monstrosity: Further comments. Rehabilitation Literature, 41(11-12), 280-283,
Lyttle, J, (2003), Humor research. Retrieved September 16,
2003, from http://phoenix,liu,edu/-jlyttle/humor/welcome,
html,
Maanen, J, V, (1988), Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
Martin, R, A, (2001), Humor, laughter and psychological
health: Methodological issues and research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 504-519,
Martin, R, A,, & Kuiper, N, A, (1999), Daily occurrence of
laughter: Relationship with age, gender, and Type A personality. International Journal of Humor Research, 12, 355384,
Martin, R, A,, Puhlik-Doris, P,, Larsen, G,, Gray, J,, & Weir,
K, (2003), Individual differences in uses of humor and their
relation to psychological well-being: Development of the
Humor Styles Ouestionnaire, Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 48-75,
McCrone, (2000, May 20), Comic relief. New Scientist.
McGhee, P, E,, & Goldstein, J, H, (1983), (Eds,), Handbook of
humor research. (Vol, 1-2), New York: Springer-Verlag,
Melnick, P, R, (1989), Humor in family dynamics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
Mindess, H, (1971), Laughter and liberation. Los Angeles:
Nash,
Morreall, J, (1983), Taking laughter seriously. Albany: State
University of New York Press,
O'Connor, S, (1995), We are all one family: The positive construction of people with disabilities by family members. In S,
J, Taylor, R, Bogdan, & Z, M, Lutfiyya (Eds,), The variety of
community experience: Qualitative studies of family and
community life (pp. 67-77). Baltimore: Paul H, Brookes,
Olson, J, M,, & Roese, N, J, (1995), The perceived funniness of
humorous stimuli. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 908-913,
Ostrover, C, (2003), What is humor! Retrieved September 16,
2003, from http://web, Macam98,ac,il/-ochayo/what,html,
Pahl, J,, & Ouine, L, (1987), Families with mentally handi-

Humor and Other Types of Fun

capped children. In J, Orford (Ed,), Treating the disorder,
treating the family (pp, 39-61), Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press,
Patton, M, Q, (2002), Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed,). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,
Powell, T, H,, & Gallagher, P, A, (1993), Brothers and sisters:
A special part of exceptional families (2nd ed,), Baltimore:
Paul H, Brooks,
Rao, S, S, (1996), A tittle inconvenience: Facilitating inclusion
in the community. Perspectives of Bengali families of children with disabilities on inclusion and disability. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Syracuse University,
Rapaport, W, S, R,, & Gibson, S, (1993), He who laughs
, ,, Lasts longer and lives better. Diabetes in the News, 12(6),
12-14,
Rehill, K, B, (1990), The significance of humor in individual
and family therapy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Widener University, Chester, PA,
Riegner, E, J, (1996), The relationship of rote strain, perceived
social support, and humor to quality of life among couptes
experiencing the life-limiting iltness of chronic obstructive
putmonary disease. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The
Florida State University College of Human Sciences,
Robinson, V, (1977), Humor and the heatth professions.
Thorofare, NJ: Slack,
Ross, P, (1985), Parents of mentally retarded children: Misunderstood and mistreated. In H, R, Turnbull III & A,P, Turnbull (Eds,), Parents speak out, then and now (2nd ed,, pp,
245-257), Columbus, OH: Charles E, Merrill,
Rudestam, K, E,, & Newton, R, R, (2001), Surviving your
dissertation: A comprehensive guide to content and process.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,
Rutter, J, (2000), The introductions of stand-up performers:
Comparing comedy comperes, Journat of Pragmatics, 32(A),
463-483,
Sales, B, D,, & Folkman, S, (2002), Ethics in research with
human participants. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association,
Samuelson, D, (1986), A letter to my daughter/myself on facing the collective fear of being different. Feminist Studies,
12, 155-167,
Seligman, M,, & Darling, R, B, (1989), Ordinary families, spe-

209

cial children: A systems approach to childhood disability.

New York: Guilford Press,
Shadish, W, R,, Cook, T, D,, & Campbell, D, T, (2002), Experimental and quasi- experimental designs for generalized
causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin,
Shoultz, B, (1995), "But they need me!": The story of Anna
London, In S, J, Taylor, R, Bogdan, & Z, M, Lutfiyya (Eds,)
The variety of community experience: Qualitative studies of
family and community life (pp, 9-22), Baltimore: Paul H,
Brooks,
Singer, G, H, S,, & Irvin, L, K, (1989), Support for care giving
families: Enabling positive adaptation to disability. Baltimore: Paul H, Brookes,
Slavin, R, E, (1989), PET and the pendulum: Faddism in education and how to stop it. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 752-758,
Stein, J,, & Flexner, S. B. (1984), Random House College Thesaurus. New York: Random House Reference Publishing,
Strauss, A,, & Corbin, J, (1998), Basics of qualitative research:
Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2d ed,), Newbury Park, CA: Sage,
Summers, J, A,, Behr, S, K,, & Turnbull, A, P, (1989), Positive
adaptation and coping strengths of families who have children with disabilities. In G, Singer & L, Irvin (Eds,), Support for caregiving families: Enabling positive adaptation to
disability (pp, 27-40), Baltimore: Paul H, Brookes,
Thurer, S, (1980), Disability and monstrosity: A look at literary distortions of handicapping conditions. Rehabilitation
Literature, 41(1-2), 12-15,
Weinberg, N,, & Santana, R, (1978), Comic books: Champions
of the disabled stereotype. Rehabilitation Literature, 39(1112), 327-331,
Welliver, D, (1986), Laughing together: The value of humor in
family life. Elgin, IL: Brethren Press,
Wolcott, H, F, (2001), The art offieldwork. Walnut Creek, CA:
Altamira,
Wooten, P, (1996), Compassionate laughter: Jest for youth
health. Salt Lake City, UT: Commune-A-Key Publishing,
Ziv, A, (1984), Personality and sense of humor. New York:
Springer-Verlag,
Received: December 3, 2003
Final Acceptance: May 8, 2004
Editor in Charge: Diane Ryndak