I wouldn't read too much into that article, it has some useful points and was eye opening in some respects, but is also making a number of assumptions and claims I am not sure I would agree with or are supportable by the evidence myself (eg all CPTSD depression is 'reactive' on a biochemical level). It's trying to draw too clearcut a distinction between 'mental illness' and 'psychiatric injury' when I think in reality it is hard to draw a line between the two and as the article itself says many people with CPTSD will have been given mental illness diagnoses at some point even if it is arguably erroneous so they certainly will have a mental illness history. I have a long history of depression and GAD, OCD and various other mental health symptoms; the diagnosis of CPTSD helps tie them all together in a way that makes sense in the context of my personal history, and accounts for other symptoms like diminished future and startle reflex that I couldn't make sense of before. Personally I think a lot of things that get classed as mental illness are the result of trauma in various forms and don't buy into the heavily reductionist pseudo scientific theories medical model psychiatrists espouse. It's also important not to confuse symptoms with 'disease entities' - psychiatry tends to conflate them far too readily.