I've practiced law for 25 years. I can say there is a lot of truth in the article for a lot of people. There is a decade of my life that is just a blur because ALL I did was work. Personally, I would never do it over again. I know lots of other attorneys who feel the same way and it doesn't really matter what law school they attended, whether they had student loan debt or whether they worked in a top tier law firm. Many have left for "alternative" legal jobs, but still do not like them (but get paid much less).
On the other hand, I know some attorneys who are very happy with the jobs. They don't seem to mind working every weekend, being tethered to their cell phone on vacation, and barely seeing their children. I don't mean that sarcastically, but that is the reality of their life. For whatever reason, they get satisfaction out of what they do. So, there are definitely people who should go to law school.
I think the point of article (I don't know this guy either) is to help people see the reality that they may face after leaving law school before making the decision to go to law school. Many of us went to law school because we liked intellectual challenges and were not aware of any other career path that might provide the challenge. As the article points out, the intellectual stimulation may not be there. And, if it is there, the stimulation comes at a cost. Sure, research sounds fun, right? Well, does it sound like fun at 3:00 a.m.? Does it sound like fun when you have a client-imposed budget that gives you less time than you can spend, but it's all your fault if you get the law wrong? Do you like the consequences of losing a multi-million case because you didn't find the case on point because you got distracted from having to constantly answer the phone or tend to a whiny client ? Do you enjoy the pressure of ALWAYS having to find the right answer and if you don't you'll be accused of gross negligence, lying, stupidity. Do you wish you had the time to do the research, but instead you spend your time nagging a client daily to give you information you critically need or you'll get sanctioned by the court? I think the point of the article is to make sure people understand that the profession is not so romantic or fun as it appears.
Are there other legal jobs than working in a corporate law firm? Of course, and I suspect some of them are more enjoyable. From reading the comments to the article, people who are sole practitioners and therefore have control over their lives, tend to have more satisfaction. But again, people going to law school need to ask themselves this question? Am I the type of person who is going to have the nerve to hang out my own shingle? Am I the type who can cultivate clients, so that I can break away from the corporate law firm life? If not (and I'm one who would answer "no"), then the job satisfaction of those people is unlikely to apply to you.
Anyway, I'm sure EVERY occupation has its downsides. I see nothing wrong with people writing articles about those downsides in order to give young people an opportunity to really understand the choices they make when they choose a career. The advice to clerk in a law firm before going to law school is good advice and that advice is probably good advice no matter what career one chooses.