<p>Psychotherapeutic interventions often aim to activate emotionally significant material in order to facilitate psychological change. Despite this shared assumption across therapeutic approaches, the role of timing has received relatively limited systematic attention in the literature, where discussions tend to focus more on the choice of technique than on the clinical judgment required to determine the appropriate moment for intervention. This article examines situations in which interventions that are theoretically appropriate nevertheless lead to destabilization when introduced too early in the therapeutic process. Rather than focusing primarily on the correctness of specific techniques, the paper explores the possibility that destabilizing effects may arise when interventions exceed the patient’s current capacity for emotional regulation and integration. Drawing on theoretical perspectives from different therapeutic traditions and illustrated by a clinical vignette, the article argues that timing represents a central but often underexamined dimension of therapeutic skill. It proposes that therapeutic restraint and the capacity to tolerate moments of non-intervention may sometimes be as important as the selection of technically correct interventions. The paper concludes with clinical implications for psychotherapy practice and suggests that greater attention to timing may help clinicians reduce the risk of unintended destabilization during treatment.</p>