Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
The debtor is not directly obligated to her minor children for Mr. Sinton’s charges, but this fact is not determinative of discharge. In the case of Silansky v. Brodsky, Greenblatt & Renehan (In re Silansky), 897 F.2d 743 (C.A.4 1990), the Fourth Circuit affirmed the holding of the District Court that attorney’s fees ordered to be paid to attorneys for debtor’s former spouse were within the coverage of § 523(a)(5) and not dischargeable, following the holdings of such cases as Pauley v. Spong (In re Spong), 661 F.2d 6 (C.A.2 1981), that classified fees allowed to a spouse’s attorneys in divorce proceedings as nondisehargeable debts in the category of alimony, maintenance, and support. See Brodsky, Greenblatt & Renehan, Chartered v. Daumit (In re Daumit), 25 B.R. 371 (Bankr.Md.1982) ; Burns v. Burns (In re Burns), 186 B.R. 637,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding debtor could not discharge that portion of his monthly army retirement benefits awarded to his wife pursuant to a divorce decree
B. holding that attorneys fees incurred in a custody action were nondischargeable under  523a5
C. holding that counsel fees awarded to debtors wife in a divorce action were nondisehargeable under  523a5
D. holding the family court properly awarded a wife attorneys fees incurred as the result of her husbands contempt
E. holding that the apparent denial of the husbands request for an order compelling the wife to deliver to him the personal property he had been awarded in their divorce judgment did not constitute a modification of the original divorce judgment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.