The purpose of this article is to protect children from sex offenders by presuming that it is not in the best interest of a child to be placed in a custodial, residential or unsupervised visitation arrangement with a sex offender where the sex offender's victim was a minor.
A. 
Rebuttable presumption against unsupervised visitation, custody or residence of a child to a sex offender. Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that no sex offender shall be awarded sole or joint custody of any child, that no child shall primarily reside with a sex offender, and that no sex offender shall have unsupervised visitation with a child.
B. 
The above presumptions may be overcome if:
(1) 
There is not a criminal sentencing order prohibiting the same; and
(2) 
There have been no further convictions for sexual offenses or criminal acts of violence; and
(3) 
The sex offender is in compliance with the terms of probation, if applicable; and
(4) 
The sex offender has successfully completed an intensive program of evaluation and counseling designed specifically for sex offenders and conducted by a public or private agency or a certified mental health professional, and as a result of such does not pose a risk to children; and
(5) 
The sex offender has successfully completed a program of substance abuse counseling if the Court determines such counseling is appropriate; and
(6) 
The best interest of the child would be served by giving residential or custodial responsibilities for the child or visitation with the child to the sex offender.
Should the Court grant custody, residential responsibilities or visitation to a sex offender under this chapter, the Court shall make specific written findings in support of its decision, including any limitations or requirements for further counseling, services or other safeguards necessary to ensure the safety and best interest of the child continue to be served.