Authentic emotional responsiveness, intersubjective validation, and mutual recognition breached rigid internal experiential frames in my analysis with Raphael, steering us from confrontation to negotiation. That collaboration led us to relax, stretch, and broaden the frame of the analysis itself, even to include larger social systems. Also, unexpected exigencies of life brought us into each other’s world in ways that neither of us expected when we embarked on our strained journey together. This ever-broadening frame raised many issues. What is the frame in contemporary analysis? When is participation in the analyst’s and/or patient’s circle of life warranted, and when is it suspect? How does one insure against a “wild analysis”? This article grapples with these quandaries.