This just feels like a statement made without empathy for why people might seek a restraining order (side note: I hate that empathize/emphasize auto correct in my first comment, but it is too late to edit it). If they truly did more harm than good from the perspective of the people seeking the restraining order, people obviously wouldn’t pursue them. So your opinion seems to be from the perspective of the target of the restraining order.

The people seeking the restraining order are victims as well, sold a lie by the justice system and lawyers.

Almost anything bad a restraining order seeker is trying to prevent is already illegal. Meanwhile loads of innocent people have their civil rights stripped such as right to bear arms without even a jury trial, and often after same order evicts them from their own house.

I don’t really know how to respond to this beyond saying that I think you proved my initial point.

Not really, your premise isn't always accurate.

Prosecutors will sometimes force such order agreement to drop or plead charges, even when the 'victim' believes the perp is innocent and wants to be with them. There are also all the de facto orders via cps 'safety plans' that separate parents under threat of taking the children. In many case no one wants that but the often wrong cps official.