The team physician-athlete relationship prompts many basic questions in medical ethics. Return-to-play decisions form many of the core responsibilities facing team physicians, and occasionally these decisions can have overriding ethical dilemmas. Therefore, a structured ethical decision-making process is a valuable skill for every successful sports medicine physician. An ethical question is confronted here in a case presentation that weighs the risk of repeat sudden cardiac death and the potential for failed cardiac resuscitation against the athlete's interest to play competitive basketball. The article applies a four-step framework for ethical decision making in sports medicine. The important first step includes gathering medical information and understanding the preferences of the athlete. Step 2 brings together the decision-making stakeholders, the team physician as a member, to define ethical issues and apply ethical principles: beneficence, non-maleficence, and patient autonomy. Step 3 selects a course of action with unbiased analysis and arrives at a good choice that merits an action plan in step 4. This decision need not be perfect, but should reinforce the team physician's responsibilities to the athlete and center on the athlete's welfare.