Does FES make soaring more or less accident prone?

Branching from a thread where FES related comments are not welcome...

On Sunday, April 5, 2015 at 7:55:55 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:

I do not own a sustainer, rather a motorglider (ASH26e) but some of the experience is relevant. 1) If you are looking at any auxiliary engine as a safety device, I think you will eventually be disappointed if not injured. 2) An engine significantly increases the pilot workload at just the moment you would like it to be reduced, that is when low and looking for lift or a landing site. 3) An engine increases maintenance for a glider by around 2x or maybe more. These are realities that must be considered along with any perceived benefit

1)I thought that FES (like other sustaining auxillary sources of thrust) reduced the possibility of landouts and that FES therefore reduced the risk of damage/injury related to landouts.

2)I thought the 'throw one switch' of FES added little to pilot workload

3)I thought that FES was lower maintenance compared to other auxiliary engine options.

If I thought wrong, I should stop daydreaming about getting a FES some day.