Context determines meaning. I thought it seemed pretty sensible and conservative actually - if read with the assumption that she is talking about treating ABUSERS. Granted in the following list: "Borderline, Narcissism, Schizotypal, Paranoid, and Anti-Social mandate nearly all of the following safeguards. Histrionic, Avoidant, Obsessive-Compulsive, Dependent, Schizoid, and Passive-Aggressive require far less." I think "borderline" is a much more problematic category than the others in its category.
I guess I come at life from a kind of Hercule Poirot "My dear, everyone lies about one thing or another" point of view. So the assertion that the client (aka "human being") is lying seems to me tautologous. Of course the client lies. Everybody lies. The crucial bit is figuring out what they are lying about and why they are lying. And compounding the problem some people aren't, strictly speaking, lying but fabricating or just reporting the result of cognitive distortions. When my H claims that I am not attracted to him, he is not telling the truth, but he is not lying either. He genuinely believes this, despite the reality. It doesn't really help to "believe" him in the sense that we then proceed as if I am not attracted to him. Because that is false. The problem is not in the reality, the problem is in his perception/interpretation of reality. If we are a bit sloppy in how we speak (as natural language always is) then he is lying. But in a more precise way, he is not. The point is that the T cannot take as "an accurate evaluation of reality" the clients' reports. It is always more complicated than one person's take can encompass. In one way, that's what we pay T's for. That seems pretty uncontroversial and not at all disturbing to me. I don't WANT my T to just swallow everything I say. I WANT her to point out when I am likely misinterpreting.
And given how easy it is to get taken in by people who have "Narcissism, Schizotypal, Paranoid, and Anti-Social" disorders, and the great harm they can do to others (including the T and by using the T) I think caution is appropriate. Obviously a T who assumes EVERY person who walks into the office is in one of these categories is not going to be a very effective T. These are not the only categories of personality disorder...
If I was a T I don't think I'd be brave/something enough to try to treat people with full blown "Narcissism, Schizotypal, Paranoid, and Anti-Social" personality disorders who've found their way into therapy because they need it for some court something or other.
P.S. A lot of the symptoms of borderline overlap with c-PTSD and even more from structural dissociation. I would guess that is one of the things that makes finding a good T such a crapshoot.