Lets imagine this child had been groomed to join a weird Christian cult or one of the polygamist Mormon groups. Would we feel differently. She was groomed by adult men who encouraged of her place in heaven, all she needs to do is have babies. She starts to see horrible a things but after a while these become normalised. Then her world starts to wobble a bit and she reaches out. At the moment she says she still feels loyal to the group who groomed her. Grooming is like brainwashing. These girls are so incredibly vulnerable. Of course she needs to come home. Deradicalised and given counselling.

If we dehumanize someone because their views are different, than we are no different than the ones we claim to be terrorists. America is founded on terrorism. If you care to argue this I can provide evidence found in the last 80 years of public education textbooks. As well as the last 250 years of documents leading up to this countries founding.

Don’t treat people poorly because you don’t like their beliefs. It doesn’t matter how extreme their beliefs are, most people are brainwashed at a young age; call it grooming, call it “raising”, it doesn’t matter, most of us are trained to think something that someone else wants us to think. Send her home safely and be done with it.

Watched an interview with an ISIS-bride last night, might have been the same
girl you're referring to in your post.
I understand that she was completely fooled by what she saw online.
I also understand that she is young, immature, and unwise to the actual
ways of the world.
I completely understand that she may be in fear for her child's life and wants to
go home.
All that taken into account, when she said that people should feel sympathy for her, that's when she lost me. Could have been her tone, could have been the words themselves, but she lost me.
She said the violence she witnessed didn't bother her. I believe that.
She was defiant and demanding that she be helped.

She's not a "refugee". She didn't "lose" her home and her country because of violence and corruption. She's a stupid little girl who STILL doesn't get it.
She deliberately left her home and her country, and made her way to live with
terrorists. I don't see her as a "victim". I see her as a stubborn teenage girl, who
still fails to see the fault lies with her and her choices.

I honestly don't know what should be done with her.
My instincts tell me that she's always going to be a problem for someone.

If you are a citizen of a country then you cannot be refused reentry. And I am sure that there are laws internally that deal with these people, on the other hand what is a terrorist to some people may be a freedom fighter to others. Who will decide? There are plenty of so called legal terrorist in western countries. Just look at Bush, Blair, Howard, etc, etc.

I said yes, because if they are that country's citizen they at least need a trial to retain citizenship. I am not advocating releasing them into the general public. Each case will need to be examined by the court and processed as seen fit.

I will add, if a country so desires, and rules, those that leave it willingly and renounce their citizenship cannot reenter I would support that, as long as that includes the wealthy who leave to ignore their financial responsibilities.

If they have no alternative citizenship, legally the UK has to let them back in.
I don't believe the UK should lift a finger to assist their return, and when they return they will have to go before the courts for any crimes under UK law they have committed.
And obviously MI5 and GCHQ will be keeping very close tabs on them when and if they are released back into the community.

She was groomed as a 15-year-old. I've known a heck of a lot of teenagers who have done a heck of a lot of stupid things; some with life-changing consequences. My fifteen-year-old self was an asshole (some might argue I haven't changed much...) and I'd hate to be judged in perpetuity based on some of the choices I made at that age.

Should she be allowed to return? Of course she should. She's a British citizen; there's no way to prevent it without rendering her stateless. Should she be made to answer for her actions on her return? Of course. That's how civilised countries work and, last I looked, we think we're a civilised country.

In the U.S., a person cannot be deported (or kept from re-entering the country) if they are a citizen. So, in that case, the person would have to, through due process of law, have their citizenship taken away. In other words, a trial first.

I have voted no, but I realise that they have to go somewhere. I think they should be dealt with by the UN, taken to a detention centre where they and their children can be re-educated and rehabilitated into responsible citizens prior to being brought back to their native countries. This present case has highlighted the problem with the U.K. not really wanting an unrepentant jihadist back in the country on one hand but realising that she is still a U.K. citizen and therefore has certain rights of domain, on the other. The children need to be kept with their mothers until they too have been de radicalised, as they will be inured in the belief that the jihadi philosophy is natural and a normal way to think. This new baby which has just been born should be given a British passport and given to the grandparents in the U.K., otherwise that child will be radicalised by the mother.

I wasn't able to pick yes or no. My emotions tell me they chose a certain path and now that this theocratic war has failed, they want to return to secular comfort. I'm very angry with them. They have children too which makes me think we should suffer the mothers on behalf of the children, I used to be a religious parent so I understand the predicament children of believers are in.

Will her husband try to join her in the future? How will she raised the children ? Will they be taught the same radical ideas ?
I'd like to say let her back in but there are so many questions I doubt I'm qualified

Lets first look at the facts. She is a UK subject, she has the absolute right to return. She joined an organisation which is at war with the UK. ISIS has killed british people.
Now lets look at some mitigating factors. She is/was very young. She has already lost 2 babies. However would she be wanting to comeback if she had somewhere else to go?
All things considered she should of course be allowed back but must take responsibility for her actions (to the degree that the law thinks a minor should). She is potentially guilty of treason and should be charged with such, unless she fully co-operates with the intelligence services.

Thanks guys for voting and for your interesting comments. As the speaker in Westminster shouts "the nos have it,the nos have it". After some consideration I am for "yes". The UK has a legal obligation to let her return. She should be interrogated and charged with the offences committed. The baby can be taken into care or looked after by the parents.

Part of me says if you choose that path then suffer the consequences. The other part says we should be bigger than those that would harm us, not perhaps to the point of passive resistance for eternity, but able to want to re-educate and re-assimilate those who have into our less dogmatic but still flawed society.

There is also the wider question of was it a real choice in the first place.

What is the most humane solution? Thereby lies the answer

There wouldn't be any issues like this if the USA and England had not created Isis in there illegal invasion and destruction of Iraq.... get over your bullshit and help theses woman and children
.

A condition for their return should be permanent, periodically verified, apostasy.

Actions have consequences

Oh, you can let her back in. She is a human being you know. That doesn't mean I would ever trust her in any shape or fashion.

They're human beings, and deserve to be treated as such. Treating people as pariahs and second class citizens will backfire.

"The United States is asking Britain, France, Germany and other European allies to take back over 800 ISIS fighters that we captured in Syria and put them on trial. The Caliphate is ready to fall. The alternative is not a good one in that we will be forced to release them........"

Trump tweet Feb 16th

Of course they should. They served the United States empire well.
Who's here is ignorant of the fact that ISIS is funded by the CIA via Saudi Arabia? Does anyone remember when ISIS Fighters fled into the Golan Heights?

she will expect to sponge off the tax payer, get free health service, and free housing, and food stamps, just what the fuck dose she think she is entitled too? she deserves prison, which the taxpayer will still end up funding.

As long as ISIS is at war with the free world, no.