That “we are the tools of our trade” (Pearlman and Saakvitne, 1995) and thus, need to address the impact of who we are on what we do suggests an omission in Steven Stern’s article—namely, attention to the role in the analysis of the analyst’s psychology. Drawing on attachment research, I theorize that we clinicians are often shaped by the unresolved trauma of parents that leaves us with (at least traces of) disorganized attachment to which we adapt with the “controlling-caregiving” strategy identified by Mary Main. This history (which is mine and perhaps Steve’s as well) welds trauma to shame, may thus have us trying too hard to be “good,” and may be part of what apparently encouraged Steve to valorize acceptance and marginalize his own subjectivity. His evolving stance was clearly healing, but the work might have been deepened had Steve explored—at times in dialogue with his patient—the impact on their relationship of his own attachment history and patterning.