You should not expect a pro bono attorney for this sort of case. But you may be able to get help anyway. Here's the thing about pro bono work:
Many attorneys will offer free consultations. Some will offer reduced rates for clients of limited incomes. But handling an entire case pro bono is another matter entirely. This is an issue that comes up a lot on this site, and this is what I always tell people:
Pro bono work is an important part of the legal tradition. I should know that if anyone does: I served on the Oregon State Bar's Pro Bono committee for three years, and was its chairman in 2011. I have handled several recent pro bono cases, including one ongoing case of great complexity. So I don't mean to discourage people from seeking out such help, and I certainly don't mean to discourage lawyers from providing it. That said:
The public often has highly unrealistic expectations for pro bono cases. People often think that if they're in trouble, they're entitled not only to complete redress, but also to free help getting it. This is almost never true. For one thing, pro bono work is generally reserved for cases with a larger social impact beyond the immediate effect on a single client.
Even pro bono cases are likely to cost a bit of money. This is because litigation has considerable expenses that have nothing to do with paying your lawyer. There are costs for postage, copying huge numbers of documents, hiring court reporters and investigators. There are filing fees and other court costs. There are often expert witnesses and other professionals (who generally do not have a pro bono tradition, and don't work for free). Oregon's ethics rules prohibit attorneys from paying these costs unless they have a reasonable expectation that they'll be reimbursed. So even pro bono clients will need to advance some money up front.
And there's another reason that an attorney might want a client to do this: In my experience, people don't value what they don't pay for. A lawyer can put a lot of work into a case, but if they're working all for free, the client may get fed up or frustrated when things don't go their way, and quit, or fail to appear for court, or stop following the lawyer's advice. This wastes all the lawyer's work and can make them look like an idiot before the Court. I am speaking from excruciating personal experience. Litigation is very slow and time-consuming and rarely works out perfectly - this is especially true in child custody cases, which often end in some sort of compromise. You may be free to walk away at any time without an investment, but your lawyer is not. Our ethics rules require us to meet certain conditions before we withdraw. If you aren't committed to it, you can subject us to a ton of trouble.
It also bears mention that many lawyers today don't have as much money as you may think. The typical law school graduate today has over $100,000 in student loan debt. We have to pay Bar license fees, extremely expensive malpractice insurance premiums, and CLE (ongoing education) costs. Lawyers are not near the bottom - we are THE bottom, dead last, in terms of available jobs for professionals. It takes a new law school graduate an average of about two years to find a job, these days. So salaries are dropping for firms, and many self-employed solo and small firm practitioners (like myself) make less than minimum wage. So we get a bit vexed, at being asked to work for free all the time. With the possible exception of medicine, no other profession so often has people demand that it work for free. But unlike doctors, lawyers don't have big institutions like hospitals to support us and try to collect payment for us. If our clients don't pay, we don't survive. You wouldn't want to do your own job for free, however badly people needed it to be done.
That said, a lot of employment lawyers take cases on a contingent basis, so if you have a claim, you may not need to lay out a lot of money up front.