SFO guy here. I would humbly suggest that if a crew is unable to comfortably execute a visual approach, with or without automation, that some additional training may be in order. In recent years US carriers have recognized the decaying of basic airmanship skills amongst many of us hey drivers, and at my airline we're seeing a significant emphasis on basic handflying skills during recurrent training.
The culture at my airline regarding automation is usually, we'll handfly up to 10,000' in VMC conditions. On arrival, in IMC conditions the AP remains engaged until visual contact with the runway environment. But in VMC conditions it's quite common to go raw data (no AP, no FD) at some point before intercepting the final approach course.course. I gather this is not a common practice at Asian carriers?
And as for SFO, in VMC conditions if you all insisted on a full ILS, we'd all be stuck with hours of flow control. Yes, the parallel approaches get a bit interesting, but the idea of inadvertently crossing into the protected space of the parallel runway's approach corridor is something we religiously brief before every arrival. It's alarming to see a carrier like CX commit that error. (If it had been China Eastern, it wouldn't surprise any of us one bit)...
Be careful out there!