Would it be completely unreasonable to allow `fundrawtransaction` to use unsafe outputs?

I understand this means the resulting transaction may be invalidated whenever the unsafe output I'm relying one disappears (e.g. because the transaction that produced it was RBF-ed) but in my case that's ok, I'll react to that and re-publish the tree of child transactions accordingly.

But let me know if you think that's too much of a footgun for users, in that case I'll architect my solution differently.
{
    LOCK(cs_);
    std::set<CTxDestination> result;
    for (const std::pair<const CTxDestination, CAddressBookData>& item : m_address_book)
    {
        if (item.second.IsChange()) continue;
        const CTxDestination& address = item.first;
        const std::string& strName = item.second.GetLabel();
        if (strName == label)
            result.insert(address);
    }
    return result;
}
bool ReserveDestination::GetReservedDestination(CTxDestination& dest, bool internal)