The author considers what seem to be norms and values concerning session frequency and length of treatment in ‘traditional’ and current child and adolescent psychotherapy practice, and the impact of training expectations and models of training on identity and status as a child and adolescent psychotherapist. In the UK National Health Service, there is pressure to do more in less time: the norm is once-weekly work. Such an expectation does not sit comfortably with psychoanalytic theory and training, which remains rooted in higher frequency, longer-term cases. For trainees, this can lead to feelings of fraudulence and questioning whether less frequent therapies imply that the work is not psychoanalysis. The author explores, through a literature review, a case study and research material, how one might acknowledge the tension between these conflicting values about time; how psychoanalytic work in all its forms might be valued and be valuable for patients; and urges the need to feedback clinical experience into training structures and ongoing learning.