With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". ALJ found that Kealoha’s actions were “consistent with a planned, and intentional action,” and therefore his suicide attempt could not have been the result of an irresistible suicidal impulse. The Board affirmed. II Kealoha argues that the ALJ and Board should have assessed whether Keal-oha’s fall caused his suicide, rather than whether his fall led Kealoha to attempt suicide out of an “irresistible impulse.” We agree. Despite the Longshore Act’s provision precluding compensation for injuries caused by an employee’s “willful intent to injure or kill himself,” 33 U.S.C. § 903(c), other courts have held that the Act does not necessarily preclude compensation for a suicide caused by a compensable work-related injury. See Voris v. Tex. Emp’rs Ins. Ass’n, 190 F.2d 929, 934-35 (5th Cir.1951) (<HOLDING>); Terminal Shipping Co. v. Traynor, 243 F.Supp.

A: holding that measures to enforce judgment are compensable
B: holding that claim for sons suicide was not actionable
C: holding under section 1902a1 specific intent required as an element of section 1501 is the intent to cause the death of an individual
D: holding suicide was compensable despite the willful intent language of section 3c then 3b
D.