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.
std::shared_ptr<CWallet> const pwallet = GetWalletForJSONRPCRequest(request);
    if (!pwallet) return NullUniValue;
    
    
    pwallet->BlockUntilSyncedToCurrentChain();
    LOCK(pwallet->cs_wallet);
    UniValue jsonGroupings(UniValue::VARR);
    std::map<CTxDestination, CAmount> balances = pwallet->GetAddressBalances();
    for (const std::set<CTxDestination>& grouping : pwallet->GetAddressGroupings()) {
        UniValue jsonGrouping(UniValue::VARR);
        for (const CTxDestination& address : grouping)
        {
            UniValue addressInfo(UniValue::VARR);
            addressInfo.push_back(EncodeDestination(address));
            addressInfo.push_back(ValueFromAmount(balances[address]));
            {
                const auto* address_book_entry = pwallet->FindAddressBookEntry(address);
                if (address_book_entry) {
                    addressInfo.push_back(address_book_entry->GetLabel());
                }
            }
            jsonGrouping.push_back(addressInfo);
        }
        jsonGroupings.push_back(jsonGrouping);
    }
    return jsonGroupings;
},
    };
}
static RPCHelpMan signmessage()