Joseph:
You wrote: “JJ, it’s expressly prohibited for a Beis Din to use secular/non-Jewish laws instead of using Halacha/Shulchan Aruch. They can’t say even though halachicly this is your asset, since non-Jewish law says to award it to the other party, that’s what we’ll do.”
Your armchair Monday morning quarterback stance is not flattering. I would agree with you that there is too long a list of complaints about batei din, and that the system is broken. But you insinuate that batei din abandon clear halacha and base their piskei din on secular law. That is absolutely untrue. Are there rogue batei din? Absolutely. These are comprised of self-serving baalei aveiroh who exploit the public and justify their rogue behavior. But that is found everywhere else, too, and batei din are not unique. Such is the yeridas hadoros that we observe today. But as a generalization, this is a vicious lie, and you know that.
There are sometimes valid reasons, sanctioned in halacha, when to apply a standard that has its source in secular law. Usually this occurs when there is no clear direction in Shulchan Aruch. You will ask for an example. What is the halachically determined standard for visitation? Shulchan Aruch does not address visitation at all. There is normative practice, and this directly or indirectly references to the secular standard. Similar to secular law, there is no connection between child support and visitation, and denying one because the ex-spouse is non-compliant with the other has zero merit in halacha or secular law.
It is correct to note that the beis din situation is poor. But the accusations you imply are outrageous and dishonest.