Parent tells Royal Oak board district failed autistic student; requests action and accountability
Summary
A parent accused the district of failing to protect an autistic student from sustained bullying and scant special‑education support, saying the family received help only after a public social‑media post and urging the board to enforce district anti‑bullying policy.
During public comment at the Oct. 9 Royal Oak Schools board meeting, Arroy Yaneka described ongoing bullying and inadequate special‑education supports for a student with autism and asked the board what concrete steps it would take to enforce district protections.
Yaneka said the student had an individualized education program (IEP) offering only speech therapy and "no meaningful support" as social and emotional struggles increased. The parent said the student’s teacher this year did not know the student was autistic and recounted abuse the student experienced, including threats (“told to die,” “told that someone would come to their house and kill them”) and repeated name‑calling. Yaneka said school staff disciplined the student who defended themselves while students who allegedly bullied were not disciplined.
"We did everything the right way. We contacted staff, documented incidents, asked for help and got nothing," Yaneka said. The commenter said the school only reached out after a private Facebook post drew attention; the initial outreach, Yaneka said, included a request to remove the post. "Only after we went public did your school offer resources, and in the same breath, you asked to silence us," the speaker said.
Yaneka framed the problem as systemic, saying dozens of families responded to a private post with similar stories and that Royal Oak has "a reputation, a bad one" for failing vulnerable students. The parent invoked national statistics on childhood suicide from the Child Welfare League of America to emphasize urgency and asked, "What is your real call to action? What are you doing today, tomorrow, and every day after that to enforce the protections you claim exist?" The speaker concluded: "Do better."
Superintendent Topelski responded from the dais saying someone from the superintendent's office or the district would reach out to the family.
Context and limitations The comment was made during the public comment period; no formal board action or investigation was announced on the record beyond the superintendent's commitment that the district would reach out. The speaker identified the student’s disability and described alleged incidents; the board did not provide further details or a timeline of any prior investigations in the public session. The district’s official anti‑bullying language and complaint procedures were referenced in the speaker’s remarks but were not quoted verbatim in the transcript.
Quotes from the meeting - "The student, who is autistic, had an IEP that offered no meaningful support beyond speech therapy and was systematically failed by this district," said Arroy Yaneka. - "Only after we went public did your school offer resources, and in the same breath, you asked to silence us," Yaneka said.
Next steps The superintendent said the district would reach out to the family for follow‑up. The board did not announce additional steps during the meeting. Reporters and community members seeking further information should contact the superintendent’s office for any records or statements the district may provide post‑meeting.
