Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
where there was no evidence son was dishonest, financially irresponsible or self-dealing, or uncaring and did not tend to her needs); In re Moses, 273 Ga.App. 501, 615 S.E.2d 573 (2005) (affirming trial court's decision to appoint ward’s sister rather than daughter as guardian of the person where although there was statutory preference for children over siblings, evidence showed ward expressed preference for sister and daughter was neglectful and abusive to ward); In re Hodgman, 269 Ga.App. 34, 602 S.E.2d 925 (2004) (finding no abuse of discretion for trial court to depart from statutory preference in appointing guardians where evidence demonstrated son mismanaged ward's assets, acting in a manner contrary to the ward's best interest); Brown v. Storz, 710 S.W.2d 402 (Mo. App. E.D.1986) ; see also Whitton, supra note 5, at
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that where the trial court denies a motion for the appointment of a guardian ad litem in a child support case the order is unappealable
B. holding that where there is competent evidence to support the courts findings the admission of incompetent evidence is not prejudicial
C. holding evidence supported appointment of mother as guardian of incompetent ward where substantial evidence demonstrated wards spouse was a habitual drunkard
D. holding that the same inference on the same record as that here was supported by substantial evidence
E. holding substantial evidence supported jury finding of abuse of process
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.