Jessica wrote in comments: The discussion I would like to read most is about conflict. I never seem to have enough of it in my stories and when I brainstorm for ways to increase the conflict I find myself saying, "That would so never happen."
Jessica, your present solution -- "...to just keep writing and know I'll figure it out eventually." -- isn't a bad one. More often than not, the toughest reader to convince is the author of the story. Sometimes you subconsciously detangle this stuff as you write, though, so pushing through can help.
Back when I started babbling about how I write novels, I mentioned asking a character three questions. Thing is, the characters come from the writer, so you're really asking yourself those questions, i.e. "If I was a bioengineered doctor who wanted to do no harm, what's the worst thing that could happen to me?" The worst thing should be what you believe could happen to such a character.
Our belief systems are all different, and in some part they govern how we write. The more pragmatic you are, the more you'll wrestle with the impractical or unlikely. Wrangle it into a form that it makes sense to you. Example: I don't believe in magic or mythic creatures, but I write around that disbelief by making the magic function only in dreams and turning the mythic creatures into aliens populating another part of the galaxy in a distant future.
I think conflict in fiction needs a good balance of reality and imagination. Enough of the real stuff to make the story resonate with the reader, but not so much that it reads like a lecture or a textbook. You shouldn't go so far off into Imagination LaLaLand that the reader can't make sense of the story, either.
You writers and readers out there, what makes novel conflict work for you? How do you make the conflict you dream up work?