This chapter examines Winnicott’s very late work in which he proposes the notion of an ‘integrate’ in the psyche of the newborn infant. In reference to André Green’s suggestion that ‘there is no such thing as a mother and infant’, Abram compares Green’s concept of the ‘other’ (of the object) taken from Lacan, with Winnicott’s ‘integrate’ that, she suggests, is more faithful to Freud’s suggestion of the father in the mother’s mind. Abram proposes that Winnicott’s ‘integrate’ is necessarily ‘paternal’ in contrast to Green’s suggestion that the ‘other’ is neutral. Drawing on Faimberg’s recent illustration of how Winnicott’s clinical work demonstrates his understanding of the importance of the paternal function, she examines the difference between the early and late father in Winnicott’s work. The clinical example re-visits the clinical work of Chapter 3, but with a focus on the analyst’s turning point to illustrate the necessity for the analyst’s psychic work and psychic functionality. Comparing Winnicott’s work on the Oedipus complex with Green’s work on thirdness, Abram proposes that, like the father in the mother’s mind, the analyst evolves a third in mind that stimulates paternal functioning in the analytic encounter. This leads Abram to make a new proposal of the analytic paternal integrate.