Clinicians may face a significant ethical dilemma: whether to plateau and profit by continuing treatment for a patient whose clinical progress has stalled, or to release and replace that patient. This situation becomes complex because the "devil is in the details" of the medical business. Factors such as the financial health of the practice, insurer reimbursement rates (especially high ones), and the clinician's employment status can create a temptation to prioritize profit over the patient's lack of progress. This dilemma stems from reconciling conflicting roles, like a clinician's fiduciary duty to the patient versus their responsibility to an employer or business stakeholders. Prolonged struggle with this ethical conflict can lead to ethical distress and eventually ethical burnout, a severe exhaustion that can include moral apathy and boundary violations, potentially ending a career. Before attempting to resolve the dilemma, clinicians should contemplate the situation to confirm it's truly ethical and explore alternatives like changing treatment strategy or reassessing the patient. Decision-making can draw on approaches like utilitarian, deontological, or virtuous perspectives. Preparing to honestly explain and justify the decision, and accepting consequences, is crucial, though potentially uncomfortable. Ultimately, navigating this dilemma can be a positive experience, offering self-discovery and growth.