This paper suggests that the prohibition against ‘taking the role of the good object’ may inhibit therapists from an appropriate recognition of a loving relation between the patient and themselves. It is argued that the prohibition actually refers to a defensive attempt to get the analyst to take the role of the idealized object as a defence against the emergence of bad objects in the transference. This clinical scenario is contrasted with one where the patient needs to find in their therapist a real good object who genuinely cares for them.