Is there a conflict of interest in the notice and explanation of a patient's constitutional rights?

[29 Cal.3d 92] At this point, a complicating companion problem is presented, namely, a role conflict arising from the fact that the agency responsible for the care and therapy of the ward is the entity which is given the added duty of notice and explanation of the ward's constitutional rights. (See Thorn v. Superior Court, supra, 1 Cal.3d at p. 675, 83 Cal.Rptr. 600, 646 P.2d 56.) The regional centers and hospital staffs charged with care, treatment, and therapy, are simultaneously entrusted with notice and explanation of rights. This role conflict may be further aggravated by an additional subtle pressure favoring hospital treatment as opposed to community placement of the ward. Local community placement may be difficult to locate and also expensive, and its cost may be borne locally by a regional center's budget. Hospital placements are funded from statewide sources. The centers, charged with administering and paying for therapy and care, and also with recommending and finding suitable placement must simultaneously determine whether an objection to the proposed hospital placement has been made. ( 4620 et seq.). A subtle strain is thereby placed on the center's impartial neutrality and detachment which unconsciously in its administrative decision may thereby favor hospital placements at state expense.