I'm trying to remember the title of book. It's about a girl, who as the title implies, is resurrected by nanobot technology. This is illegal, as using too much of it takes up "points", and she's using too much. Her father is the inventor of this technology. She feels detached from her previous identity and most of the book is her struggle with existential questions. There was also interludes in poetic format showing the final moments of the girl after the accident that caused it all. I think the girl had "Fox" in her name, and the book had a title format of "The __ of (protagonist name)."
The adoration of Jenna Fox, by Mary E Pearson.
This is from the back cover:
Jenna Fox wakes from a year-long coma following a devastating accident, her memory a blank. One day she cant walk; the next she can. One day her right eyelid droops; the next it doesn't. Her parents call her recovery a miracle but at what cost has it come? What are they hiding from her? And why does her grandmother, Lily, hate her so? When the memories do come, they're more than anyone bargained for, and as Jenna struggles to work out who she is, and what exactly makes us who we are, one thing becomes very clear: Jenna Fox is no ordinary teenage girl.
NiceAnswer, NiceOrc.– ValorumJul 27, 2015 at 22:46
possible duplicate of scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/80103/…– OtisAug 17, 2015 at 3:34
1Otis, the two questions seem to be remembering different aspects of the book. If two different questions have the same answer, does that make them duplicate questions? (Not snarky, I'm genuinely asking!)– NiceOrcAug 17, 2015 at 4:47
@NiceOrc: Sorry for the late reply. There seems to be an ongoing debate about the proper duplicate policy here. My main goal is to connect questions that are related so that other searchers will have the benefit of the "Linked" section at right. For example, someone searching for this story with terms "girl resurrection nanotechnology car crash" would have at least some of the benefit of both posts (i.e. description here and title of the related post). I probably should have put the comment on the question instead of your answer.– OtisOct 2, 2015 at 4:33