One needs to consider what a "committal height" is and what it represents.
The hard deck decision height is what a rational flight test program determines for the conditions and is a bit like the H-V curves the helo guys get twitchy about ... serious stuff.... a missed approach from a lower level is most likely to be an underwhelming success ....
For normal operations, the operator will impose a comfort margin above the demonstrated figures, if they, indeed, exist, or, if not, the operator will determine some suitable comfortable level for its operations.
Either way .... either the pilot (operator) is serious in operations or not ... if one nominates a height then the whole idea of standard operations and rational behaviour goes out the window if we are going to try a missed approach from a lower height just because something untoward occurs.
In the situation of a for real two engine out (727 was in the same situation with two out ... only a bit worse off) ... then one would have declared a VERY serious emergency situation and there ought not to be many likely scenarios which could have the pilot comtemplating a below decision height missed approach.
... back to square one .... in such circumstances the pilot has to make a D ... better to try and avoid the errant obstacle and still land in the general area of the intended touchdown under control .. rather than land upside (Vmca departure) or with wheels up (during missed approach reconfiguring) ...
Could I enquire of Lancer what circumstances he/she envisages that would be so dreadful as to cause the pilot to contemplate sticking his/her neck in such a well-knotted noose ?
Re Checkers' comments ... sure, we all have done the exercise on 3- or 4-motored aircraft ... but to contemplate doing so in anger from a silly height is not very intelligent ...