You are declaiming in ignorance. Family law proceedings ARE public, so are the files. However the public's right to know IS balanced against other rights.The family court may seal records under Calif. Rule 2.550, provided that the conditions there are satisfied. I have no quarrel with that. But the court did not seal any records in my case under that rule.
The children in family proceedings have rights that they are ill equipped to defend. Chief among these in your case "George" are medical/mental facts, history, and diagnosis of your young children. That is why the court may seal certain evidentiary material.
In my case, the children were well-equipped to protect their privacy rights. Commissioner Irwin H. Joseph appointed a lawyer, James Ritchey to represent those interests. I paid his bills, at $200 per hour.
The records in question do not say that my kids have any medical or mental problem, or that they have had any unfavorable diagnosis. The records say that the kids are healthy, happy, and doing well.
The records were approved for release by CPS agent Sally Mitchell, her boss, her boss's boss, Ritchey, County Counsel Shannon M. Sullivan, and Cmr. Joseph. Only after Ms. Mitchell gave contradictory testimony and Cmr. Joseph said that he was not relying on her, the records did he order that her testimony and records were to be sealed. He never argued that there was any need to protect the kids under Rule 2.550. He just sealed them because they were personally embarrassing to him and to CPS.
Yes, I do use a pseudonym for myself, but not for those who, openly and publicly, make false, malicious, and vindictive accusations against me in court. They have told everyone in town that my kids are abused kids. Public access to the records would show the opposite. I am defending my kids' rights when I post evidence that they were not abused.
I would have much preferred it if my case were not public. It was my ex-wife who went public with this stuff, not me. I am just defending myself and my kids.