"Эта сестра, что я всюду таскала за собой."
\____________A______________/
Normally we don't speak the part A as of an animate. More to the point, because we're not linking the verb "таскать" to an animate as appropriate.
The next thing, if we substitute an animate object for a lifeless thing,
"Эта книга, что я всюду таскала за собой."
this sounds as a chaotic colloquial speech in a context where the speaker is a little lost, and has mixed feelings about something. This is the way to a correct expression of that. Literary and written Russian:
"Эта книга, которую я всюду таскала за собой."
"Эта сестра, которую я всюду таскала за собой."
But your question is more about whether or not we can substitute the pronoun "что" for a living thing. it turns out, while the pronoun "кого" pointed out to an animate man-person, we don't have the counterpart for an animate woman-person. For example,
Этот брат, кого я всюду таскала за собой. (okay, given what we have said)
Это существо, что я всюду таскала за собой. (okay, too)
*Этот брат, что я всюду таскала за собой. (*Ungrammatical, there IS "кого")
^^^_________________________________|
Logically, what is fair for a man-person could be applied to a woman-person, but as long as there is no counterpart to "кого", then it somehow became acceptable in conversation.
There is the way for literary and written Russian with "кого":
Это говоришь мне ты, кого я всюду таскала за собой? [:astounded](okay)
where "ты" can be a woman-person or man-person.
*Это говоришь мне ты, что я всюду таскала за собой? (Ungrammatical)
^^^_________________________________|
ungrammatical, because "что" pointed out to smth but "ты".