I was surprised at the number of autism-related posts we've done over the years (here and here, for example). They all seem to have one thing in common, though: they are primarily about autism in children.

But children (eventually) grow up, and of course face additional - albeit different - challenges:

"It’s getting easier for parents of young children with autism to get insurers to cover a pricey treatment called applied behavioral analysis. Once kids turn 21, however, it’s a different ballgame entirely."

Seems that, once you hit that magical age of 21 [ed: Wait, what? According to the ObamaTax you're still a toddler at age 26], those mandates mostly fall off, leaving young adults without coverage. It should be noted that such coverage isn't "free:" its cost (as with every mandated benefit) is built into our ever-increasing premiums.

But it seems to me that, if we're going to pay for life-style choices (*cough* birth control convenience items *cough*), then why aren't we considering conditions which are not under one's direct control? I'm not proposing another mandate, of course, but certainly there ought to be some room for discussion.