Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
cases involving the custody, care, and control of children is divided between the District Court and Probate Court. Pursuant to 19-A M.R.S. § 103 (2015), the District Court has “original” jurisdiction over cases involving parental rights, but the Probate Court has exclusive jurisdiction to appoint guardians for minors pursuant to 18-A M.R.S. § 5-102(a) (2015). More and more frequently, family litigation causes these two court systems to exercise concurrent jurisdiction, and the “marriage” caused by this concurrent jurisdiction is very rocky. Although 19-A M.R.S. § 1654 (2015) confers on the Probate Court concurrent jurisdiction to award parental rights and responsibilities “[i]f the father and mother of a minor child are living apart,” see Marin v. Marin, 2002 ME 88, ¶ 7, 797 A.2d 1265 , in actuality, the Probate Courts deal with
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding in termination of parental rights case that trial court erred in taking judicial notice of evidence before him in guardianship hearing in same case
B. recognizing that the probate court may determine issues of parental rights and responsibilities as they relate to the guardianship proceeding in which they arose
C. recognizing that a court is not limited in what it may consider in determining whether parental rights should be terminated
D. recognizing this substantial interest in context of termination of parental rights
E. holding that a respondent in a termination of parental rights proceeding may not file a counterclaim
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.