I disagree as regards the change of classification which is to place Parabrochymena in synonym for Brochymena because we base ourselves on an opinion and not on a scientific article.
Parabrochymena has to be a genus to part according to Rider (2012. The Heteroptera (Hemiptera) of North Dakota I: Pentatomomorpha: Pentatomoidea. The Great Lakes Entomologist Vol. 45: 312-380): https://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~rider/Pentatomoidea/PDFs/R/Rider_2012a.pdf
It is written on the page 348: "Acceptance of this division has not been universal, but it seems best to follow this classification until a more thorough study has been completed (see McPherson and Ahmad 2005, 2007, for further discussion)".
I suggest to read this note of my blog:
https://www.inaturalist.org/journal/jeanfrancoisroch/13250-brochymena-arborea-et-parabrochymena-arborea
I shall continue to write Parabrochymena arborea on my entomological labels.

Sorry, for whatever reason the "sources" box is very specific and doesn't allow me to add a source. I based the change on Bugguide, which is iNat's listed authority for North American taxonomy, per https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator+guide#policies. iNat's policies are to defer to the listed authorities, and "we explicitly do not track the taxonomy from the primary literature"

The discussion on bugguide is old (2011), but as Bugguide is iNat's insect authority, policy is to use its taxonomy.
https://bugguide.net/node/view/3133
https://bugguide.net/node/view/482890#857301

I think the key is to find a bugguide curator and have them update the main page to reflect what seems to be the current understanding of these. If this discussion was from 2011, but the paper came out in 2012, I'd think it's time for them to at least acknowledge the paper on the page.

https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/277189