Looking at the books, there are several times when Dresden makes "stupid" decisions that feel like compels.
Like how he no choice but to take the money to investigate Lilly's disappearance in Summer Knight. That was clearly a compel of his "broke" Aspect that the GM used to advance the story.
The compel there, is 'this is probably a bad idea, but you're flat broke, and would like to keep eating', NOT 'do this or else'
Harry COULD have turned it down, and found some other way to earn money. He's bent his rules with regard to 'No love potions...or other entertainment' before.
Harry's player accepted the Compel (likely seeing it as the plot hook it was, or just being starved for fate points like most wizards), and
narrated the situation as Harry not seeing any other option.
Having no alternative... That's rarely the case. It's just that the alternative looks so bad that it just might as well not exist.
"You have to let the bad guy go OR let the orphans burn in the magical fire you started. If you let then you'll get the law breaker bit and the police will be looking for you for murder. Your choice."
The Compel, there, assuming it's against one of the character's aspects, and not a scene aspect created from fallout, is the STARTING of the fire, not the choice between letting the bad guy go and saving the orphans. And even if it's a scene aspect, a more
appropriate Compel isn't a dichotomous choice, but simply a statement of the situation: 'the building is on fire, and if something isn't done, the orphans will die (a result of the character's use of magic that would earn Lawbreaker), but the bad guy is about to get away'.
That, at least, leaves room for creative solutions, like a spell that sucks enough heat out of the building to extinguish the flames, redirecting it into a pillar of flame straight up into the sky that will attract all kinds of attention, and would likely require enough shifts of power that the character will have to take a consequence or two (one for channelling that many shifts, and quite possibly another in backlash), but would allow them to at least have a fighting chance with regards to chasing down the bad guy.
Straight-up dichotomies are almost exclusively
bad ideas in collaborative storytelling (ie pen+paper rpgs)
As for compels, if you really hate them then don't take Aspects that call on you to do the right thing at the right time. Or save chips to buy them off. If you've got the Aspect "defender of the weak" and you've been using it to win your fights then a compel of "You have to let the big bad guy get away while you help the girl tied to the alter" is an acceptable one. Yes, it will mean fighting the big bad guy after he's rested and called up more minions, but you've defined yourself as defender of the weak and that girl needs you now.
It's like when a girl comes up to Dresden and says "Help me." and he says "Sure." and she says "But I'll only let you help me if you help my vampire boyfriend too. Please Mr. Dresden, don't leave us here to die". Dresden knows that he can barely get himself out, but he's got that Aspect and needs his chips (or is out of them), so he does what he can to save the girl and her vampire lover.
Richard
Again.
DICHOTOMIES ARE BAD. Be more creative.