The timing of residency training often coincides with peak biological fertility. However, family building is frequently deferred and may lead to unanticipated infertility. The attitudes and barriers to family planning are not well described among medical professionals and trainees in radiation oncology (RO). The Society for Women in Radiation Oncology (SWRO) conducted an electronic survey among practicing physicians, physicists, and residents between January and February 2023, using email and social media as recruitment tools. The survey questions queried demographics, family planning, fertility. Frequencies of responses were summarized using descriptive statistics. On interim analysis, 147 responses were collected; 123 (89.8%) were SWRO members. Gender identities reported were female (136, 93.2%), male (7, 4.8%), nonbinary or gender diverse (2, 1.4%), and transgender female (1, 0.7%). 95 (64.6%) respondents were age 35 or younger. The majority were practicing physicians (72, 49.0%) followed by RO residents (45, 30.6%), medical physicists (17, 11.6%), medical students, (5, 3.4%), and medical physics residents (4, 2.7%). Most respondents agreed that their reproductive timeline had been impacted by medical training (106, 76.3%). Of those who deferred parenthood due to training or career, 40 (36.7%) were dissatisfied with their choice and 33 (30.2%) were satisfied. 129 (92.8%) reported not receiving any information about fertility preservation during training. Only 65 (47.4%) felt they had a mentor with whom they could approach to discuss family planning. Overall, 84 (60.4%) expressed concern about their fertility and 34 (24.5%) had previously undergone fertility testing. 16 (11.5%) completed at least one cycle of elective fertility preservation and 12 (8.6%) were planning to do so. 39 (28.1%) had considered elective fertility preservation but not pursued it, while 65 (46.8%) had not considered it. Among those two groups, the common reported barriers to accessing fertility services were financial burden (n = 28, 28.6%), lack of awareness of available options (n = 12, 12.2%), difficulty accessing fertility services (n = 6, 6.1%), and difficulty finding time during training (n = 4, 4.1%). Insurance coverage for elective fertility preservation was fully or partially covered by insurance for 12 (8.8%), not covered for 53 (38.7%), and 72 (52.6%) were uncertain of their coverage. The study highlights the impact of training on family building plans of medical professionals in RO. Despite high levels of concern about fertility, few respondents received education about fertility options in training and a limited number had access to mentors to discuss this issue. Significant barriers exist to accessing fertility services, including knowledge gaps about insurance coverage, highlighting a need for further exploration of these barriers and advocacy for improved family planning support for those in RO who desire it.