CM.
All approaches are monitored! 
Use of the monitored (shared) approach depends on the situation; the context of an approach.
Some situations warrant offloading the physical workload of the more experienced pilot enabling more time to assess the overall situation, e.g. a complex approach pattern or time critical decisions in low visibility operations.
On other occasions there are advantages in the more experienced pilot handling the aircraft for both the approach and landing, particularly where the manual feel of the aircraft is important - abnormal ops, limiting crosswinds. Getting into the loop early.
It is important to have a company philosophy, flexible - not a fixed SOP, with awareness of the risks of old style flying ‘all approaches captain only’. Thus using experience wisely, yet still enabling the less experienced pilot to gain experience for ‘command’ monitoring and assessment, decision making, and handling the aircraft.
The level of automation available, decision cue lights, verbal rad alt, and weather are other variables.
Also to have a specific procedure; verbal only is time limited thus min height restrictions. A mix of verbal / manual - hand tap on the thrust levers should meet the most stringent conditions in low visibility.
(Yes, PF has a hand on the thrust levers).
Crew awareness in low vis will be improved by the head up pilot providing a commentary - “contact”, “centreline, crossbar”, “green threshold”, “runway” etc; stating colour is useful.
There is no hard sell of a monitored approach; its your choice after examining contributory factors with reasoned judgment.
This issue is the classic ‘there is no definitive answer’ - ‘it depends’; uncertainties which the industry dislikes and often constrains with procedures with little thought of the factors above - ‘there is no one fits all’ in aviation.