Most marital gripes should be irrelevant

I don't quite understand why the family court experts bother listening to gripes about behavior between the (estranged) husband and wife.

Suppose that I had regularly beaten my wife black and blue, without provocation. My wife might have reason to file a police complaint, or maybe ask a judge for a restraining order. But it would not be relevant to a divorce hearing, because California has no-fault divorce, and it would not be relevant to a custody hearing, because the allegations do not involve the kids.

Eg, the questionaire for the family court investigation has a checkbox for "Refusing to let you leave a room or place where you live". My wife checked that item, and gave only this justification: "standing in doorways refusing to budge".

I don't remember ever blocking a doorway. My house has multiple exits, so that would not have stopped her anyway. But what if it is true? Is the court psychologist supposed to remedy this alleged injustice by giving my wife custody of the kids?

My wife's lawyer advised her to make an assortment of wacky allegations against me, so I can only assume that the court psychologists, when they do child custody evaluations, do indeed modify their recommendations in order to mete out their own personal system of rewards and punishments. They aren't acting in the best interests of the children, but trying to act as judge and jury over who was a better spouse during the marriage.

If no-fault divorce really meant what it was supposed to mean, then the family courts would refuse to listen to petty and unproven charges. All it really means is that the court ignores my wife's adultery.