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.
if (block_height && fAbortRescan) {
        WalletLogPrintf("Rescan aborted at block %d. Progress=%f\n", block_height, progress_current);
        result.status = ScanResult::USER_ABORT;
    } else if (block_height && chain().shutdownRequested()) {
        WalletLogPrintf("Rescan interrupted by shutdown request at block %d. Progress=%f\n", block_height, progress_current);
        result.status = ScanResult::USER_ABORT;
    } else {
        WalletLogPrintf("Rescan completed in %15dms\n", GetTimeMillis() - start_time);
    }
    return result;
}
void CWallet::ReacceptWalletTransactions()