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.
{
    AssertLockHeld(cs_);
    unsigned int count = 0;
    for (auto spk_man : GetActiveScriptPubKeyMans()) {
        count += spk_man->KeypoolCountExternalKeys();
    }
    return count;
}
unsigned int CWallet::GetKeyPoolSize() const
{
    AssertLockHeld(cs_);
    unsigned int count = 0;
    for (auto spk_man : GetActiveScriptPubKeyMans()) {
        count += spk_man->GetKeyPoolSize();
    }
    return count;
}
bool CWallet::TopUpKeyPool(unsigned int kpSize)
{
    LOCK(cs_);
    bool res = true;
    for (auto spk_man : GetActiveScriptPubKeyMans()) {
        res &= spk_man->TopUp(kpSize);
    }
    return res;
}
bool CWallet::GetNewDestination(const OutputType type, const std::string label, CTxDestination& dest, std::string& error)