Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
were offered or admitted in evidence. 3 . It is not clear from this record why the final hearing occurred two months after service on Ducatt. 4 . Jusseaume offered this testimony without objection. 5 . If one party’s cross-examination of the other could result in harassment, intimidation, or threats, the court may exercise its discretion to constrain that cross-examination. See M.R. Evid. 611(a)(3) (“The court shall exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence on direct and cross-examination so as to ... protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.”). "[Tjrial judges retain wide latitude ... to impose reasonable limits on ... cross-examination based on concerns about, among other things, harassment, p 5 (1997) . There is no allegation here, however, that
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that parents may not voluntarily terminate their rights in a child to avoid child support payments or contract away a child support obligation
B. holding that a court may take steps to minimize fear in a child witness if the court finds that the child would be substantially traumatized in a way that compels the limitation of confrontation rights
C. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in changing the surname of the child where the court made factual findings that the name change would be in the best interest of the child
D. holding that the trial court did not err in allowing a witness to testify regarding the child victims hearsay statements prior to the child testifying because ocga  24316 allows testimony about a childs outofcourt statements even in cases when the child does not appear as a witness as long as the child is available at the trial to testify
E. holding that an outofwedlock childs pending claim for retroactive child support was nondischargeable in bankruptcy because a debt for child support arises upon the birth of the child and that the fact that no court had yet ordered the debtor to support the child does not take the debt outside the scope of 11 usc  523a5
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.