Many of the same safety arguments could be applied to SE IFR, and frequently are to SE over water, or even over mountains. You pay your money and take your choice; CPL's flying ME kit aren't a good measuring stick - they have the big toys, and quite frankly I'd suggest there's a little bit of willy waving and sensationalism going on - I'm quite sure most people would rather have a big comfortable twin at most times.
Yes, there's increased risk, no doubt. Granted I did mine in Australia where it takes 10 hrs, and the environs slightly different, however my personal opinion is it's a great thing to do. For those of us who aren't likely to ever do an instrument rating, it's liable to develop you as a pilot (instrument flying & nav skills, and planning) - that impacts your day VFR as well.
IO540 is correct of course - the right night can be as good as hard IMC. Mine included mandatory remote area work (black hole), and a lot of instrument appreciation. My answer would be that you are much more picky about your night weather than you are about day. In the UK and europe there's so much light around it's hard not to have a good visual reference if the weather is half decent.
I've used it several times where a delayed departure would otherwise have sunk the flight when on long trips, and for me it deletes the requirement to remain in sight of surface, allowing me to fly out of sight of ground using radio nav etc. I understand that's not so here and the IMCR is required however.