In this paper, I will start from brief comments on some elements of the psychoanalytical field model in order to highlight the most common “side effects” of such approach. I would assume that there are no perfect models, that only the knowledge of the most frequent criticisms of the way we work will allow us to pick up the early warning signs of their appearance. I'm going to examine three fundamental features of the analyst's style in an analytic field model: the oneiric as essential quality of the session, the unsaturated as ethical dimension, the narrative style. Then the paper examines four potential sources of the model's “side effects”: the role of reality in a field model, the hazard in an inappropriate use of reverie, the risks of confusion and feelings of persecution caused by an excess in the un-saturated style, the inevitable risks of self-disclosure. In the last part of the article I'm going make do some brief considerations about the inevitable fallout of an unsaturated/narrative style on the termination of the analysis.