Do not believe the erroneous information you hear from the medical community. I am 50 and caught herpes when I was 20. Over the last 30 years and many dozens of outbreaks I have noticed that my sores only develop on the skin formerly covered by the foreskin. My father had himself circumcised at 21 because he said his foreskin pulled back only manually.
I was circumcised (butchered) as a baby, so I do not know for sure, but because "I am quite wide" I suspect I would have inherited the same retractability issue my father had. If my foreskin was only manually retractable like my father's, because herpes comes up on the points of contact and all my soars come up between my circumcision scar and glans, it stands to reason that I (at least) would not suffer outbreaks. It is also possible that difficult to retract foreskins developed (via evolution) to protect those people who are particularly susceptible to herpes. BTW, I have never been able to be married or have children because no woman has wanted to risk getting herpes. I have been alone for the last 30 years.
Many people are infected with herpes and don't ever show symptoms. That may be because the virus can enter the body through the shaft skin and outer foreskin which the virus does not like as much as the mucous membrane that lies on the underside of the foreskin. If there is any chance I am correct, please heed this advice because herpes can ruin your son's future sex and family life.
You are a one dog study. It proves nothing. I am sorry your have herpes. 80% of people with HSV have no idea they have it because they have no outbreaks but you happen to be in other 20 %
Have you talked to a doctor about suppression therapy with Acylovir or other drugs like it?
The girl gave it to me on purpose because I did not love her, even though it was agreed that it was a sex only relationship before we slept together. Between being rejected and being impotent over worrying about spreading it, I learned to live without sex. What I really regret was not having children, but I am too old now. She ruined my life.
I am in a support group and many other guys seem to have their outbreaks in the same area. I have been the victim of many doctors who were just dead wrong, so "official" proclamations don't impress me: I have Lyme disease (lab confirmed) because just like the "circumcision does not increase the chances of catching herpes" assertion, they asserted I could not catch Lyme from a Dog Tick. My case is now advanced because they would not give me antibiotic when I immediately requested treatment.
Of course my statements were speculation, but my assertions are as likely to have as much validity as any others. In fact because I live with the patterns while many doctors just treat it, my theories and observations may be even closer to the truth.
In terms of circumcision, I have opinions I can state as a cut boy, then man, completely unrelated to herpes.
I saw one boy nude, other than myself, before I hit puberty. Both of us being born in the US, the chances were greatest that other boys I might see would be circumcised like me, but against odd I saw one of the uncut boys. I noticed the dramatic difference in the way our penises looked and even though I did not know what circumcision was nor why we looked different, I felt strongly at that moment that his was the way a penis was supposed to look and mine was not. Why would I think that? Being a thinking person I theorize now that, "pubescent boys and men inherently respond to a vagina because of the way it looks. If has to be "hard wired" in the brain what it is supposed to look like otherwise why would an erection occurred in a boy who never saw one before? If this is true, maybe a boy inherently knows what his natural penis is supposed to look like and maybe that is why I felt the way I did. Of course this is speculation, but I have regretted not having that extra part since that day.
I would advise any mother not to have her son cut for reasons much simpler, less debatable, less speculative [than above] and more obvious: IT IS HIS. I have never understood how anyone could even try to debate this simple fact. Any counter argument is pointless, as most boys in Europe are uncut and do just fine. Also consider this: How many European boy or men choose to get circumcised after a typical infection? I will bet my eyes it is also 0%.