No, it is from unfortunate personal experience. Special needs families get the short end of the stick in a lot of ways - ours included. Feel free to IM me about it if you want specific anecdotes. After killing myself to get my kids what they need (navigating insurance denials, waiting lists for specialists, underfunded and confusing government programs, lack of childcare, hitting out of pocket maximums year after year, and taking jobs that leave me exhausted and with little family time to pay for it all), I have a huge defense mechanism for anything that sounds like it can quickly and easily solve this kind of situation - because I've been repeatedly shown it is a pipe dream. It doesn't mean UHC isn't a noble cause or the right way to go. But the reality is that it probably won't be much of a qualitative change for families like ours. And it is hard to hear that our experiences and fears are not valid.

You're the one making a lot of assumptions based on what was originally a shower thought. It's a nice thought but it's completely and utterly incorrect in reality.

My kids are real life examples demonstrating that huge investment, while good for the individuals, does not reduce the cost or burden of them to society later in their life.

This isn't an assumption, it's a data point that contradicts your hypothetical theory.

The fundamental flaw in your thinking is your assumption that treating mental illness and disabilities will result in the person becoming a productive member of society. This is occasionally true, but much more commonly, the treatment serves to alleviate the more severe symptoms of the condition, without actually curing or fixing the condition.

Healthcare is primarily about minimizing the damage and suffering caused by various physical and mental ailments. It can't magically transform people into something they're not.