@deirdre @Mick West
Just so I'm clear, my problem with the original framing (prior to the court document point addition) was mainly that it seemed to rely on the reader making a "reasonable" judgement of what had actually happened, rather than a "one size fits all" debunk that could only be disputed with clear facts.
Personally, I look at her posts and see she was in a poor financial situation, potentially homeless, had problems with the school, was contesting custody with an ex-partner who was clearly more financially secure and could very likely provide a more stable home environment. Even without getting into conjecture about her character, behaviour or mental state, it seems perfectly reasonable that the court would decide to take those things into account when deciding on custody. So for me and anyone else like me, simply pointing out that there were plenty of other things going on besides the "chemtrail" thing is enough to reasonably debunk the story.
The problem I see is that the people these sites are targeting believe that the most "reasonable" scenario is actually that the school or state initiated the separation somehow, purely because she expressed her beliefs. These are the people who really "need" a solid debunk, because otherwise they can discount any explanation as opinion, or liberalism, or bigotry, or whatever, and they're the ones who'll likely be spreading the "bunk" further (as with the version of the UKIP child snatching story). We can try and convince them by saying "No, look, there's all these other factors too that the court would have had to consider", but it's unlikely to be effective, there needs to be "facts", things that can only really be disputed by presenting evidence.
That's why I think the point about there being no evidence of the author having access to court documents is really the key, it's a "fact" unless it can be proved otherwise (along with other points you mentioned). Given the entire article looks to have been C&P'd from Becca's blog and he only seems to know her by her social media name, that looks to be pretty unlikely.