You don't have the right to ignore the visitation order, if that's what you're asking.
You should 1) hire an attorney, 2) go to court to address the visitation order. You'll want to restrict his visitation.
This is not something you should try to do without an attorney. The bar is set quite high.
You can go to court and ask for supervised visitation if that is what you want. Consult with an atorney.
IF YOU FOUND THIS ANSWER "Helpful" or " The Best Answer" YOU CAN THANK ATTORNEY RADDATZ BY MARKING IT SO because Avvo awards the attorney points. MS. RADDATZ is donating her time and talent by answering questions to help those in need of legal information. This is NOT a consultation and in no way creates an attorney-client relationship. YOU SHOULD ALWAYS PERSONALLY CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY IN YOUR LOCAL AREA who has specific expertise in the area of law you are asking about.
How long has the father been a convicted felon? Was the child's father on probation when the custody order was put into effect? While you may have some basis for modification of visitation, a lot depends upon timing as well as whether the child's father commit acts in the presence of the child which could endanger the child. You have no right to withhold visitation. If you do not have an attorney go see one immediately. As stated in response to your other message, there are many good lawyers in your area.
If you feel the fact are on your side, the proper course of action is to file motion to restrict visitation--the attorneys are very articulate in their responses on this point.
Keep the following in mind though.
First, the Court will impose upon YOU the burden of showing [by a preponderance of the evidence] that father's visitation will endanger the children. The burden has been described as deliberately "stringent" and "onerous."
The "presumption" is that your ex is "entitled" to "reasonable visitation rights."
There is a very famous case which closely parallels your details. It has stood strong and has been extensively followed in subsequent cases of record.
This case had the following key facts: history of "incidents" including the following a prior arrest for disorderly conduct in the presence of the children, and prior physical restraint of "Respondent" when she was in a hospital five years previously.
The Court was not swayed and awarded visitation--it held that the disorderly conduct took place 2 years prior and the hospital restraint 5 years prior. It also highlighted that the parents had not interacted in many years.
In short, the court was pointing out that "passage of time" between a given "incident" and the hearing can "mitigate"/offset the troubling nature of past events. The Court will emphasize recent events directly impacting the children.
That being said, this is not a slam dunk one way or the other. Additional supply of details would enable a qualified attorney to give you a better assessment of your chances of success.
It would be critical to verify what evidence you have, and what evidence he could deploy. Often, the more committed party prevails in these cases, as they are better organized and knowledgeable. If your ex is "washed up," good news for you. If his life is "on the mend," you are facing a more difficult situation.
All reasons to consult an attorney for additional follow-up ASAP. I don't wish to make you pessimistic--just cautious before you are "all in."
The author provides the preceding information as a service to the public. Author's response, as stated above, should not be considered legal advice. An initial attorney-client conference, based upon review of all relevant facts/documents, will be necessary to provide legal advice upon which the client should then rely.
Sign up to receive a 3-part series of useful information and advice about child custody law.