I think there is a lot of nonsense talked about light twins personally
The accident rates are far BETTER than a light single - go check the NTSB website and see for your self. If you look at twin accidents, the accident rate is far less but the fatality rate is higher. Most of the accidents seem to be CFIT type accidents and not aeroplane failure accidents or "loss of control". They are more of a handful but then again someone who regularly flies a twin will be a more experienced pilot (in general), probably explaining the low "loss of control" type of accidents.
Secondly, in all the light twins I have flown, I have always been able to climb single engine. True I have probably been below MAUW, but that is how I mostly fly a Twin anyway - 3 or 4 of us for a weekend. Even a dodgey old Seneca II has a single engine service ceiling of 13000' and it will readily climb up there. I failed an engine on a DA42 at 6000' over California with 3 POB and plenty of fuel and we were climbing quite happily with no drama. As many instructors say, it is quite boring, and boring when flying is a good thing unless you are doing aeros
But back to the OP's question - what do you feel safe in? I took off out of Edinburgh in a Single in 600m RVR and 200' OC and rain. I had the GPS on showing me the Forth in case we had to ditch but I didn't feel particularly worried. At 4000' we were on top in glorious sunshine (apart from the Cbs towering around us but that is another story!).
My buddy who flies bizjets is very loathed to even cross the channel in a SEP these days - maybe with age and experience your fear increases, which is why in the USA when flying around California / Nevada and the hostile terrain there I now nearly always rent a twin !