I want to understand what my options are.
Clauses like "what my options are" are often called embedded questions. I have no idea why. I find that label confusing and misleading. Perhaps the concept of embedded questions makes sense in other languages, but I can't make any sense of it in English.
Clauses like this imply questions, but they don't resemble questions because they don't directly represent questions. The things that they represent are answers.
In your example sentence, I assume that you already understand the question. I don't imagine that you need the question explained to you. What you want to understand is the answer.
The standard way to form a question is through subject-auxiliary (or subject-operator) inversion. The first (and occasionally only) word of the verb is at the beginning of the clause and usually in front of the subject.* English uses this kind of inversion to mark the interrogative mode and sometimes the subjunctive mode. Either way, the inversion takes the clause out of the indicative mode.
A subordinate clause like "what my options are" uses the indicative mode. If you can regard it as a statement of the answer, that should make perfect sense. The indicative mode is used for statements just as the interrogative mode is used for questions.
The example sentence is not a question and it does not contain a question. It is a statement which references another statement. A question is implied, but that question does not itself appear in the sentence.
We could, if we wish, literally embed a question, and this would result in a reasonable paraphrase of the original:
I want to understand the answer to the question "what are my options?"
In this case, the question itself appears in the sentence and that question does use the ordinary interrogative word order.
* The notable exception is when the subject of the question is an interrogative pronoun. For example, "who are you?" doesn't use an "are who you?" word order.