The bill would have prevented insurers from denying coverage on the basis that treatments are educational rather than medical in their necessity. Families would have been able to appeal denials to an independent review panel if an initial grievance to the insurer was unsuccessful. All treatments included in the bill's scope were required to have been peer tested and clinically approved.

This was an opportunity to simply do the right thing for the ever-increasing number of families whose children are diagnosed with autism. As insurance chairman, I am always wary of adding new mandates and costs to a health care system that's already too expensive, but parents who pay health care premiums and are dealing with this diagnosis should not be told that treatments for their children are out of reach.

This proposal would have addressed a fundamental lack of fairness and given hope to families across New York and I pledge to continue to fight for a change to help those affected by autism.