Right to counsel
While a state may have many statutes, court decisions, or court rules governing appointment of counsel for a particular subject area, a "Key Development" is a statute/decision/rule that prevails over the others (example: a state high court decision finding a categorical right to counsel in guardianships cases takes precedence over a statute saying appointment in guardianship cases is discretionary).
Legislation, Custody Disputes - Children
The court must, if requested by the child (and may, on the court's own initiative) appoint counsel for children in cases involving a) domestic relations; b) custody or support of an out-of-wedlock child; c) paternity; or d) a petition by a person with an emotional tie to a child for intervention in a child custody, placement, or guardianship proceeding. Or. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 107.425(6), 109.072(5). See also In re Marriage of Thomason, 174 Or.App. 37, 44 (Ct. App. 2001) (explaining that court's ability to appoint counsel is limited to specific situations enumerated in statute; to hold otherwise "would be a limitless grant of authority to appoint counsel for a child at any time—even upon the court's own motion—and to impose the costs on the child's parents.").
If "yes", the established right to counsel or discretionary appointment of counsel is limited in some way, including any of: the only authority is a lower/intermediate court decision or a city council, not a high court or state legislature; there has been a subsequent case that has cast doubt; a statute is ambiguous; or the right or discretionary appointment is not for all types of individuals or proceedings within that category.
Appointment of Counsel: categorical Qualified: no