I agree with your second paragraph. I do not get why there are some cruel people here at FR telling her to get over her whining. I just read this as relating a story and why this is not such a good thing.
As to your first paragraph, there was one couple like that who did use a sperm donor to have a deaf baby. I know it is hard to understand, but for many deaf people, they do not see themselves as broken. I have a personal interest in this. I think they were selfish and should have raised the many deaf orphans that are out there first. By the way are you sure you heard them interviewed... on the radio?? :)
Yes, I am sure, because the entire program was about "def culture."
... they do not see themselves as broken.
$$$$$
I understand their perspective, and while it is laudable, it should not translate into deliberately setting out to produce a deaf child. If two people with any kind of genetic problem marry, and are willing to love and support the children that result from their marriage, I am totally supportive of their choice. But to deliberately try to design a deaf child, to me, is no different from designing a blind or palsied child. Why manufacture a person with a known problem? Especially when other women use the same kind of situation (reasonable certainty of a defect) as a reason to abort a child.
Many deaf persons could hear as children, learned to speak and gradually became deaf from illness, or suddenly became deaf from an accident. Others have imparied hearing to the point of legal deafness but still hear enough with amplification devices to learn to speak. I know both kinds of deaf people; one speaks flawlessly but cannot hear and must face you to read your lips.