Although the ethics theories I have been offering of late would say a lot about the reasons people take the moral stances they do and why, they offer very little as to why a person would choose amorality. Granted such a person would find it "immoral" or "untruthful" (or at the very least, unhelpful) to maintain an absolute moral standard, but how would we represent that in terms of Model B intrarelational dynamics?
This seems to me a very relativistic topic.
I first offer that the cheif interest to the amoral person is in assisting their dual. They will choose first the ethical options and, if the ethical options are insufficient, then they will consider unethical options. I am not sure how this would manifest in terms of Model B interfunctional relations, though.
I think Bill Clinton is an example. On personal terms, he's duplicitous and unethical, imminently untrustworthy. However, on a large scale he demonstrates profound (relativistic) ethical integrity that earned him the praise of a majority of Americans during his presidency. We could thus say that he is morally ambivalent with regard to interpersonal relations, yet morally upright in regards to his relationships with many people.