This article doesn't mention autism secifically, but it talks breifly about genetic engineering and what it means for "undesirbale traits", and some other things I thought were relevant. Here's the article:
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/bein...lving.html
Here's some excerpts:
One form of the dopamine receptor gene DRD4 has become much more common over the past few thousand years. The rate of increase suggests the gene has been positively selected for, though it's not clear why: the variant is associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
(it's clear from the way they discuss this, they have no idea why anyone would want to have kids with someone with- *gasp*- ADHD. 
)
"Without a doubt, the most important selective pressures continue to be on brain function," says Wills.
This is one reason why Lahn's discovery of recent brain evolution has created such a stir. Lahn agrees with Wills that the defining feature of human evolution is that our minds have shaped our environment, which in turn has led to evolutionary changes in the way we think, and he is convinced it is continuing. Wills goes further, arguing that in the modern world nobody can do everything, so the advantage lies in being good at something that not many others can do well. "My prediction is that we are not simply getting smarter, we are selecting for more variability in our behaviours," he says.
Ooooohhh.... that looks like it would be good news for aspies. Our intense focus and tendency to become experts in a certain area makes us favorable mates! 
Miller foresees a future in which parents try to eliminate traits that they personally find undesirable, but says it's impossible to predict how that will affect the human gene pool. There are, however, human characteristics that will probably always be seen as desirable, and are likely to be actively selected for by genetic technology. In 1000 years, Miller predicts, "people will be much more beautiful, intelligent, symmetrical, healthy and emotionally stable, due to 40 generations of genetic screening against harmful mutations".
Of course, this guy makes the assumption that humans all agree on what makes someone beautiful & other desirable traits. We don't. Haven't you ever seen someone walking around with their arm around someone who is hideously ugly? Physical "beauty" is not as strongly selected for as people seem to think. After all, there are plenty of people out there who can find merit in a person who is not classically "beautiful", be it because of their personality or mind or other reasons.
So where are we heading? Most experts agree that trying to predict the direction of evolution is a fruitless exercise. "Evolution is not really a predictive science," says Jones. Others point out that we may not like where we're heading. "Perhaps we will so befoul our planet," says Dennett, "that only an eccentric and hardy remnant of our species - which can survive on earthworms while living in underground burrows, for instance - will remain."
That made me laugh.
