it never fails that when there is good work (imo, but have we all spent time looking at the work itself?) the question inevitably comes up about how it was done, and the ethics of it. While we are at it lets open the discussion to include Weegee, Arbus, Natcheway, Norfolk, Alpern, ...name your own who has run afoul of the propriety/niceness/ethics/ rules that we all are supposed to abide by. When we say, "the ends don't justify the means" that is a double judgement, but if you like the work then you can't really talk about the other.
of course we can all have opinions about behaviour, but to discount the work because you don't like that the photographer or artist is -insert, drunk, addict, rude, unsavory, mean, naive, etc. is to connect two dots that don't connect.