Which CBT are you talking about- there are 30-plus varieties- PE, CPT, MBCT, compassion-focused therapy, reciprocal inhibition, TF-CBT, DBT, ACT, Behavioral Activation, Beck's models, REBT, ABA, systematic desensitization, David Burns model, Stress Inoculation Therapy, Self-Instructional Training, Narrative Exposure Therapy, etc, etc. The IPNB people are long on hypothesizing and very deficient in hypothesis testing. Much of what they call research was based of finding from fMRIs, notorious for test-retest reliability and temporal resolution issues. BTW, even they have abandoned mother-blaming terms and have supplemented "mother" for "caregiver." Mother-blaming decontexualizes women and sees them out of the ecological space.
I'm not arguing that Dr. Dan Siegel and his colleagues have not made contributions (I'm trained in the Mindsight approach). I'm saying the extant research, free of confirmation bias, does not support the conclusions that CBT, in its many varieties, doesn't work. The concept of equinfinality (that all approaches work) has been upheld in study after study. It would very sloppy research design to portray CBT, the first, second and third waves, in monolithic terms. How would you know what it is that you are studying? CBT could help them with that erroneous all or nothing thinking.
One of the most effective ways of stabilizing a crisis to the point where any therapy is effective is good old fashioned needs assessment and resource brokering. It's very hard for anyone to be present for therapy when shelter, food and are necessities are not available.