A consensus has developed in the literature on the Young Offenders Act that it is more offense-oriented than offender- oriented, that the use of custody has increased under the act, and that the former condition has contributed to the latter. This article reports on a study that examined these assumptions. The study used a large, cross-sectional sample of youth court cases, and included data on the offender's criminal history. The data pertained to all youth court cases that reached disposition between April 1, 1990, and March 31, 1991, in eight provinces. The disposition analyzed for each case was the "most serious disposition," coded as "custodial" (including open and secure custody), versus "noncustodial." The seriousness of the offense in each case was indicated by the "most serious charge." The findings suggest that the choice between a custodial and noncustodial disposition was determined primarily by the offender's prior record and that the seriousness of the current offense played a less important role. This suggests the primacy in this decision of society's protection through incapacitation and deterrence, rather than the "justice model" of punishment in proportion to harm done. It seems implausible, therefore, that any increase in custodial dispositions under the Young Offenders Act is due to an offense orientation. 6 tables, 25 notes, and 39 references