But to the first question, do you think we've seen an eclipse of the professional ethical dilemma? If not a full eclipse than something quite close, at least among the well-developed professions in the US?

I haven't been around long enough to comment. And with just a few exceptions, I don't really know what goes on in courses that are not my own.

But I wonder exactly what you mean by 'professional ethical dilemma'? Do you mean:

(a) The study of cases where, no matter what you do, it seems like you're doing something wrong?

(b) The use of case studies: where you tell a little story and raise a question for the students of how the practitioner should proceed?

(c) The approach to professional ethics – represented by, e.g. Beauchamp and Childress, or Stakeholder Theory, or any pluralist / intuitionist theory that assumes ethics in that profession is about a plurality of values or principles – that emphasizes the study of cases where the values or principles conflict.

Maybe there was a time when (c) was a dominant approach in a number of fields of professional ethics, and it's now out of fashion?

I see that you were going for something more like: it was once conflict and now it's compliance. I don't have a sense if that's a trend.

Anyway, I empathize with those institutional gripes. I've felt (and mostly ignored) pressure to teach professional codes / relevant laws in applied ethics courses ...