This is a subject that has recurred in many of my workshops and talks on photography: "Why I don't create B&W images? Do I dislike them?"
First of all I love B&W photography (when it makes sense), and I don't exclude that I'll use this visual language in future works (if I consider it appropriate) as I have sometimes used in the past. Some clarification is needed.
Now that nonsense like "B&W is the photography closer to reality" (yes, in a world of color-blinded people!) or that "B&W is the only real photography" are subsiding to the evidence of times and evolution, and now that B&W is to be considered just another potential elaboration out of a color-digitally-shoot file, choosing to go this way is only a matter of interpretation. B&W has the power of giving force to "the situation" depicted avoiding the "distraction" of the environment's atmosphere. Sometimes B&W is used to make weak images look more powerful, but this trick is not resisting when the reading goes beyond the first impression. On the contrary: it can only outline the weaknesses of the composition.
I think the photographer should have only one thing in mind: the final image as he had (or should had) envisioned from the moment before he shoot to the final step of the creation (print or else). When you "see" an image you already know if this will be a strong photo, and what you "see" in that first moment is the finished picture. Adding or subtracting effects will only weaken your vision. If you see in B&W (not because you are color-blind) then go for it.. The freedom and vastness creativity has obtained in recent times by digital technology is amazing: abusing it would be counterproductive.