I'm glad you expressed a critique of the article referenced. The writer is on to something valid, I believe, in distinguishing emotional fragility from emotional sensitivity. I think it's also valid to say that sometimes people mix up the two and incorrectly rationalize their fragility, by seeing it as a natural outcome of emotional sensitivity, which it is not. Beyond that, though, this psychologist has written a pretty confused article. She's just not a good writer, for one thing. I'm inclined to doubt that she has great prowess as a psychologist either, for some of the same reasons you've mentioned.

She makes some errors of logic. For some individuals, emotional fragility is a chronic part of their mental makeup. As she says, they lack internal resources. They are not well adapted to coping with the rigors of life. However, anyone can experience going through a time of emotional fragility. Anyone can be in a circumstance where they are unusually stressed and don't cope as well as they usually do. This is why we offer special support to the recently bereaved. We expect that they are fragile for awhile.

I would agree that it's not good to be fragile in the face of every stressor all the time. That would meet my definition of immaturity. I don't mean that harshly. There is apt to be a truly sad story underlying an individual's failure to mature. It's not always because that person was spoiled by their parents. Some children are woefully under-indulged, which can easily be as destructive as being over-indulged. It may seem that we see more of the latter than of the former, but I've seen both.