With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". determination of whether the adoption was in the Children’s best interest. See Id.; In re J.M.S., 83 S.W.3d at 86. It is axiomatic that in adoption cases and termination of parental rights cases, the evidence as to the statutory grounds for adoption without consent or termination of parental rights are also generally relevant to the court’s determination of the child’s best interest and welfare. See In re Adoption of F.C., 274 S.W.3d 478, 483 (Mo.App. S.D.2008) (finding “innumerable factors ... may be considered in determining whether an adoptive placement is in the children’s best interests” and that “the best-interests analysis is very fact-intensive and may turn on very subtle factors.”) (internal quotation and citation omitted); In re C.A.M., 282 S.W.3d 398, 409 (Mo.App. S.D.2009) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the implied consent rule cannot be

A: holding foreseeability is based on the totality of the circumstances not on a mechanical prior similar incidents rule
B: recognizing that district courts finding of reasonable suspicion or probable cause based on the totality of the circumstances is ordinarily accorded deference
C: holding that the reasonableness inquiry is based upon the totality of the circumstances in determining whether or not a search was reasonable
D: holding a trial courts bestinterest determination is a subjective assessment based on the totality of circumstances
D.