The implicit immorality of the home office is examined on the basis of concerns that it exploits patients as a result of privileged analyst self-interest and usurps patients’ control over environmental factors that could be potentially distressing or therapeutically harmful. The author argues that the inherent nature of physical space is not grounds for ethical concern and is only relative when juxtaposed with professional action. The case for a prescriptive ethics is further discussed in light of ethical consequentialism, concluding that the pursuit of providing an ideal treatment ambiance is an illusion. Strictures against the home office further compromise the individual liberties of both the analyst and the patient.