you lost me too William. I just checked the tree and it's logical. And Thomas Mendenhall-126 doesn't have any children connected. (Neither does his brother Thomas Mendenhall-150... I seem to recall that I left those unmerged because of the disparity of birth years - it's possible one Thomas died young and the family named a second child Thomas (especially since the dad's name was Thomas).
I don't see that what you posted actually illustrates a current problem with the tree.
More perplexing to me is that a decision about Mildenhall-1 and Mildenhall-2 (Mildenhall or Mendenhall) is still pending 6 months later, and - if Mendenhall - then something needs to be figured out about Mendenhall-98, which should be a match for Mildenhall-2/Mendenhall-131, but has different parents (brother Francis, maybe, with Francis Mendenhall-99 born 1588 and Francis Mendenhall-141 b 1618 but both dying 1673).
If this is your line, you have quite a challenge!! I tried to help, but I don't know enough about these folks to figure out the Thomas/Francis question (unless the Mendenhalls were like my Watkins & Dixon lines, and all the brothers had sons named after their brothers... that might mean the lines of Thomas son of Francis and Thomas son of Thomas have gotten merged incorrectly... again, I don't know them well enough to suss out who's whose!).