Our governor signed the NC budget behind closed doors, with no ceremony, and with a public statement that she had real reservations about the budget...which begs the question of why did she sign it? How do leaders decide when to fight and when to concede? How do we as social work leaders weigh the harm in continuing to fight (e.g. not signing a budget and having the state continue to struggle without one) versus the harm in compromise and concession (e.g. signing a budget that has HUGE cuts in HHS, DOC, etc.)? Are there some things that are simply non-negotiable, that no matter how much they may harm us or others we simply cannot compromise on or concede to? If so, what are they? Do we as leaders have a right to make these kinds of decisions when they may harm others, without consulting with these others first?

The ethics of moral dilemmas is something requiring much self-reflection and collaborative discussion among social work leaders. I'm not sure we do enough of this.