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.
{
    auto spk_man = GetLegacyScriptPubKeyMan();
    if (!spk_man) {
        return false;
    }
    LOCK(spk_man->cs_KeyStore);
    if (!spk_man->ImportScriptPubKeys(script_pub_keys, have_solving_data, timestamp)) {
        return false;
    }
    if (apply_label) {
        WalletBatch batch(GetDatabase());
        for (const CScript& script : script_pub_keys) {
            CTxDestination dest;
            ExtractDestination(script, dest);
            if (IsValidDestination(dest)) {
                SetAddressBookWithDB(batch, dest, label, "receive");
            }
        }
    }
    return true;
}
std::pair<int64_t, int64_t> CalculateMaximumSignedTxSize(const CTransaction &tx, const CWallet *, bool use_max_sig)