At the same time, despite a great number of already developed instruments, none of them has been adopted as etalon that would suit as the basic instrument all parties concerned, as it might be expected from an actually new scientific discipline pretending, consequently, to the reproduction of its results. One has only to look through the contents of the Quality of Life Newsletter issues of the past few years to see that there is no unified theory and methods of developing quality of life measuring instruments and that a great many of scientists have been trying to develop and adopt autonomously “their own” instrument as the basic one without providing, however, any adequate theoretical and empirical substantiation of their claims. It is no wonder that the Newsletter began the year 2000 with publishing an editorial in which C.Joyce actually questions researchers about the social significance of work on developing QOL measuring instruments. Indeed, what are we, where are we from, where are we going to and whom are we needed by?